OF  pmcBr. 


Oyf 


"^OLOGlOkl  SBfO'S!^ 


•^5 

aM5o 


^^^kf^J^h 


OuujpuM-  l(hfQ 


/:   '".  ^'\ 


'  i  -J  ; 


',  V  >•    .  •  '  -» 


THE 


LIFE  OF  JESUS  CHRIST 


HISTORICAL  CONNEXION  AND   HISTORICAL 
DEVELOPEMENT. 


AUGUSTUS   NEANDER. 


TRANSLATED    FROM    THE 


jFourtti  ffierman  lEtjftfon, 


JOHN  M'CLINTOCK  AND  CHARLES  E.  BLUMENTHAl, 

FBOFE380BS   IN  DICKINSON   COLLEGE. 


NEW    YORK: 

HARPER    &    BROTHERS,    PUBLISHERS, 
82   CLIFF    STREET. 

18  48. 


Entered,  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  one  thousand 
eight  hundred  and  forty-eight,  by 

Harper  &  Brothers, 

in  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  Southern  District 
of  New  York. 


TO  MY  CHRISTIAN  BRETHREN 

IN  THE  UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA. 


The  present  age  may  be  considered  an  epoch  of  transition  in 
the  developement  of  the  kingdom  of  God  ;  and,  as  such,  it  is  full 
of  signs.  Among  the  most  striking  of  them  is  a  greater  zeal  for 
the  spread  of  the  Gospel  and  the  Bible  through  all  nations,  com- 
bining many  and  various  agencies  for  that  work ;  as  well  as  a 
closer  union  among  all  earnest  Christians,  seekers  of  salvation  and 
truth,  of  all  lands,  however  widely  separated — a  new  Catholic 
Church,  which,  amid  all  the  diversity  of  outward  ecclesiastical 
forms,  is  preparing  that  unity  of  the  spirit  which  has  Christ  for  its 
foundation.  Especially  is  it  matter  of  rejoicing  to  see  a  grow- 
ing spirit  of  fraternal  union  between  the  Christians  of  the  Old 
World  and  those  of  the  New ;  a  land  in  which  Christianity  (the 
destined  leaven  for  all  the  elements  of  humanity,  how  various  so- 
ever) developes  its  activities  under  secular  relations  so  entirely 
novel. 

It  was,  therefore,  very  gratifying  to  me  to  learn  that  Professors 
M'Clintock  and  Blumenthal  had  determined  to  put  this  volume, 
the  fruit  of  my  earnest  inquiries,  before  the  transatlantic  Christian 
public  in  an  English  dress.  To  see  a  wider  sphere  of  influence 
opened  for  views  which  we  ourselves  (amid  manifold  struggles, 
yet  guided,  we  trust,  by  the  Divine  Spirit)  have  recognized  as  true, 
and  which,  in  our  opinion,  are  fitted  to  make  a  way  right  on 
through  the  warring  contradictions  of  error,  cannot  be  otherwise 
than  grateful  to  us.  For  truth  is  designed  for  all  men :  he  who 
serves  the  truth  works  and  strives  for  all  men.  The  Lord  has 
given  to  each  his  own  charisma,  and  with  it  each  must  work  for 
all.  What  is  true  and  good,  then,  is  no  man's  own  ;  it  comes  from 
the  Father  of  Lights,  the  Giver  of  every  good  gift,  who  lends  it 
to  us  to  be  used  for  all.  And  what  is  true,  must  prove  itself  such 
by  bearing  the  test  of  the  general  Christian  consciousness. 

But  the  pleasure  with  which  I  write  these  words  is  not  un- 
mingled  with  anxiety.  To  write  a  history  of  the  greatest  Life  that 
has  been  manifested  upon  earth — that  Life  in  which  the  Divine 


X  THE  AUTHOR'S  ADDRESS. 

glory  irradiated  earthly  existence — is  indeed  the  greatest  of  hu- 
man tasks.  Yet  tlie  attempt  is  not  presumptuous  (as  I  have  said 
in  the  preface  to  the  German  edition),  if  it  be  made  upon  the 
Gospel  basis  :  every  age  witnesses  new  attempts  of  the  kind.  It 
is  part  of  the  means  by  which  we  are  to  appropriate  to  ourselves 
this  highest  life ;  to  become  more  and  more  intimate  with  it ;  to 
bring  it  nearer  and  nearer  to  ourselves.  Every  peculiar  age  will 
feel  itself  compelled  anew  to  take  this  Divine  Life  to  itself  through 
its  own  study  of  it,  by  means  of  science,  animated  by  the  Holy 
Spirit ;  to  gain  a  closer  living  intimacy  with  it,  by  copying  it.  To 
eat  His  flesh  and  drink  His  blood  (in  the  spiritual  sense)  is  indeed 
the  way  to  this  intimacy  ;  but  science  also  has  its  part  to  do,  and 
this  work  is  its  highest  dignity.  But  yet,  in  view  of  the  grandeiu- 
and  importance  of  this  greatest  of  tasks,  in  view  of  the  difficulties 
that  environ  it,  and  our  own  incapacity  to  execute  it  adequately, 
we  cannot  see  our  work  diffused  into  wider  and  more  distant 
circles,  without  fear  and  trembling.  We  are  fully  conscious  of  the 
dimness  that  surrounds  us,  growing  out  of  the  errors  and  defects 
of  an  age  just  freeing  itself  from  a  distracting  infidelity.  May  we 
soon  receive  a  new  outpouring  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  again  bestow- 
ing tongues  of  fire,  so  that  the  Lord's  great  works  may  be  more 
worthily  praised  ! 

I  have  another,  and  a  peculiar  source  of  anxiety.  This  book 
has  arisen  (and  it  bears  the  marks  of  its  origin)  amid  the  intel- 
lectual struggles  which  yet  agitate  Germany,  and  constitute  a 
preparatory  crisis  for  the  future.  Those  who  are  unacquainted 
with  those  struggles  may,  perhaps,  take  offence  a't  finding  not  only 
many  things  in  the  book  hard  to  understand,  but  also  views  at  va- 
riance with  old  opinions  in  other  countries  yet  undisturbed.  The 
English  churches  (even  those  of  the  United  States,  where  every 
thing  moves  more  freely)  have  perhaps,  on  the  whole,  been  but 
slightly  disturbed  by  conflicting  opinions  of  precisely  the  kind  that 
find  place  among  us.  Had  they  to  deal  with  the  life-questions 
with  which  we  have  to  do,  they  would  be  otherwise  engaged  than 
in  vehement  controversies  about  church  order  and  other  unessen- 
tial points.  It  would  be  easier,  then,  for  them  to  forget  their  minor 
differences,  and  rally  under  the  one  banner  of  the  Cross  against 
the  common  foe.  Perhaps  a  nearer  acquaintance  with  the  relig- 
ious condition  of  other  lands  may  contribute  to  this  end. 

I  am,  notwithstanding,  still  afraid  thc»t  some  readers  unac- 
quainted with  the  progress  of  the  German  mind,  which  has  de- 


THE  AUTHOR'S  ADDRESS.  xi 

veloped  new  intellectual  necessities  even  for  those  who  seek  the 
truth  believingly,  may  take  offence  at  some  of  the  sentiments  of 
this  book.  Especially  will  this  be  likely  to  happen  with  those 
who  have  not  been  accustomed  to  distinguish  what  is  Divine  from 
what  is  human  in  the  Gospel  record  ;  to  discriminate  its  immutable 
essence  from  the  changeful  forms  in  which  men  have  apprehended 
it ;  in  a  word,  with  those  who  exchange  the  Divine  reality  for  the 
frail  support  of  traditional  beliefs  and  ancient  harmonies.  I  would 
lead  no  man  into  a  trial  which  he  could  not  endure  ;  I  would 
willingly  give  offence  to  none,  unless,  indeed,  it  were  to  be  a  transi- 
tory offence,  tending  afterward  to  enlarge  his  Christian  knowledge 
and  confirm  his  faith.  How  far  this  may  be  the  case,  I  am  not 
sufficiently  acquainted  with  the  transatlantic  Church  to  be  a  com- 
petent judge.  Nor  would  I,  on  my  own  sole  responsibility,  have 
introduced  this  work  (which  arose,  as  I  have  said,  among  the 
struggles  of  our  own  country)  to  a  foreign  public :  this  I  leave 
to  the  esteemed  translators,  hoping  that  their  judgment  of  the  con- 
dition of  things  there  may  be  well  founded. 

But  of  this  I  am  certain,  that  the  fall  of  the  old  form  of  the 
doctrine  of  Inspiration,  and,  indeed,  of  many  other  doctrinal  preju- 
dices, will  not  only  not  involve  the  fall  of  the  essence  of  the  Gospel, 
but  will  cause  it  no  detriment  whatever.  Nay,  I  believe  that  it 
will  be  more  clearly  and  accurately  understood  ;  that  men  will  be 
better  prepared  to  fight  with  and  to  conquer  that  inrushing  infidelity 
against  which  the  w^eapons  of  the  old  dogmatism  must  be  power- 
less in  any  land  ;  and  that  from  such  a  struggle  a  new  theology, 
purified  and  renovated  in  the  spirit  of  the  Gospel,  must  arise. 
Everywhere  w^e  see  the  signs  of  a  new  creation;  the  Lord  will 
build  himself,  in  science  as  well  as  in  life,  a  new  tabernacle  in 
which  to  dwell ;  and  neither  a  stubborn  adherence  to  antiquity,  nor 
a  profane  appetite  for  novelty,  can  hinder  this  work  of  the  Lord 
which  is  now  preparing.  May  we  never  forget  the  words  of  the 
great  apostle,  "  Where  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  is,  there  is  Liherty." 
Whatever  in  this  book  rests  upon  that  one  foundation  than  which 
none  other  can  be  laid,  will  bear  all  the  fires  of  the  time ;  let  the 
wood,  hay,  and  stubble  which  find  place  in  all  works  of  men,  be 
burned  up. 

Perhaps  the  impulse*  which  the  American  mind  has  received 

*  Not,  it  is  to  be  hoped,  a  one-sided,  partisan  tendency,  as  is  justly  remarked  by  Professor 
Porter,  whose  article  on  "  Coleridge  and  his  American  Disciples,"  in  the  Bibliotbeca 
Sacra  for  February,  1847,  I  have  read  with  great  interest. 


xii  THE  AUTHOR'S  ADDRESS. 

from  the  profound  Coleridge,  who  (hke  Schleiermacher  among 
ourselves)  has  testified  that  Christianity  is  not  so  much  a  definite 
system  of  conceptions  as  a  power  of  life,  may  have  contributed, 
and  may  still  further  contribute,  to  prepare  the  way  for  a  new 
tendency  of  scientific  theology  in  your  beloved  country. 

A.  Neander. 

Berlin,  November  4,  1847. 


TRAxNSLATORS'  PREFACE. 


The  work,  of  which  an  English  version  is  presented  in  this 
volume,  appeared  originally  in  1837.  It  has  already  passed 
through  four  editions,  from  the  last  of  which*  this  translation  has 
heen  made. 

It  is  well  known  that  Dr.  Neander  has  been  engaged  for  many 
years  in  writing  a  "  General  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and 
Church,"  and  that  he  has  published  separately  an  account  of  the 
"  Planting  and  Training  of  the  Early  Christian  Church  by  the 
Apostles."  He  would  doubtless  have  felt  himself  constrained,  at 
some  period,  to  give  a  history  of  the  life  and  ministry  of  the  Divine 
Founder  of  the  Church ;  and,  indeed,  he  states  as  much  in  the 
preface  to  this  work  (page  xxi.).  The  execution  of  this  part  of  his 
task,  however,  would  perhaps  have  been  deferred  until  the  com- 
pletion of  his  General  History,  had  not  the  "  signs  of  the  times" 
urged  him  to  undertake  it  at  once.  Its  immediate  occasion  was 
the  publication,  in  1835,  of  Strauss's  "  Life  of  Christ,"t  a  work 
which,  as  every  one  knows,  created  a  great  sensation,  not  merely 
in  the  theological  circles  of  Germany,  but  also  throughout  Europe. 
A  brief  sketch  of  the  state  and  progress  of  parties  in  Germany 
may  be  useful  to  readers  not  familiar  with  the  literature  of  that 
country ;  and  we  here  attempt  it,  only  regretting  our  incapacity 
to  give  it  fully  and  accurately. 

Notwithstanding  the  dread  with  which  German  theology  is 
regarded  by  many  English  and  some  American  divines,  it  was 
not  in  German  soil  that  the  first  seeds  of  infidelity  in  modern 
times  took  root.  It  was  by  the  deistical  writers  of  England,  in 
the  early  part  of  the  last  century,  that  the  authenticity  of  the  sa- 
cred records  was  first  openly  assailed.  The  attacks  of  Toland, 
Chubb,  Morgan,  &c.,  were  directed  mainly  against  the  credibil- 
ity and  sincerity  of  the  sacred  writers ;    and  their  blows  were 

*  Das  Leben  Jesu  Christi,  in  seinem  geschichtlichen  Zusammenhange  und  seiner  ge- 
Bchichtlichen  Entwickelung  dargestellt  von  Dr.  August  Neandek,  vierte  und  verbesserte 
Auflage,  Hamburg,  bei  Friedrich  Perthes,  1845. 

t  Das  Leben  Jesu,  Kritisch  bearbeitet  von  Dr.  David  Friedrich  Strauss.  2  Bdo. 
Tubingen,  1835,  4te  Aufl.,  1840. 


xiv  TRANSLATORS'  PREFACE. 

aimed,  avowedly,  against  the  whole  fabric  of  Christianity.  It 
is  needless  to  say  that  they  failed,  not  merely  in  accomplishing 
their  object,  but  in  making  any  very  strong  or  permanent  impres- 
sion on  the  English  mind.  Nor  has  an  infidelity  of  exactly  the 
same  type  ever  obtained  firm  footing  in  Germany.  The  English 
Deism,  first  promulgated  in  the  WolfenbiUtel  fragments,  set  the 
German  theologians  at  work  upon  the  canon  of  Scripture,  and 
upon  Biblical  literature  in  general,  with  a  zeal  and  industry  un- 
known before ;  and  many  of  them  pushed  their  inquiries  with  u 
freedom  amounting  to  recklessness  ;  but  a  direct  and  absolute  de- 
nial of  the  authority  of  the  word  of  God  is  a  thing  almost  unknown 
among  them.  Still,  professed  theologians,  of  great  talents  and 
learning,  and  holding  high  official  positions,  adopted  a  theory  (the 
so-called  Rationalism)  more  dangerous  than  avowed  infidelity, 
and  succeeded,  for  a  time,  in  diflTusing  its  poison  to  a  painful  extent. 
The  declared  aim  of  the  Rationalists  was  to  interpret  the  Bible 
on  rational  principles ;  that  is  to  say,  to  find  nothing  in  it  beyond 
the  scope  of  human  reason.  Not  supposing  its  writers  to  be  im- 
postoi-s,  nor  denying  the  record  to  be  a  legitimate  source,  in  a  cer- 
tain sense,  of  religious  instruction,  they  sought  to  free  it  of  every 
thing  supernatural ;  deeming  it  to  be,  not  a  direct  Divine  revela- 
tion, but  a  product  of  the  human  mind,  aided,  indeed,  by  Divine 
Providence,  but  in  no-  extraordinary  or  miraculous  way.  The 
miracles,  therefore,  had  to  be  explained  away ;  and  this  was  done 
in  any  mode  that  the  ingenuity  or  philosophi/  of  the  expositor 
might  suggest.  Sometimes,  for  instance,  they  were  no  miracles 
at  all,  but  simple  natural  facts ;  and  all  the  old  interpreters  had 
misunderstood  the  writers.  Sometimes,  again,  the  writers  of  the 
sacred  history  misunderstood  the  facts,  deeming  them  to  be  mi- 
raculous when  they  were  not;  e.  g.,  when  Christ  "healed  the 
sick,"  he  merely  prescribed  for  them,  as  a  kind  physician,  with 
skill  and  success ;  when  he  "  raised  the  dead,"  he  only  restored 
men  from  a  swoon  or  trance  ;  when  he  "subdued  the  storm,"  there 
was  simply  a  happy  "coincidence,"  making  a  strong  impression 
upon  the  minds  of  the  disciples  ;  when  he  fed  the  "  five  thousand," 
he  only  set  an  example  of  kindness  and  benevolence  w4iich  the 
rich  by-standers  eagerly  followed  by  opening  their  stores  to  feed 
the  hungry  multitude,  &c.,  &c.  But  even  this  elastic  exegesis, 
when  stretched  to  its  utmost  capacity,  would  not  explain  every 
case :  some  parts  of  the  narratives  were  stubbornly  unyielding, 
and  new  methods  were  demanded.     For  men  who  had  gone  so 


TRANSLATORS'  PREFACE.  xv 

far,  it  was  easy  to  go  farther  ;  the  text  itself  was  not  spared  ;  this 
passage  was  doubtful,  that  was  corrupt,  a  third  was  spurious.  In 
short,  "  criticism,"  as  this  desperate  kind  of  interpretation  was 
called,  was  at  last  able  to  make  any  thing,  and  in  a  fair  way  to 
malie  nothing,  out  of  the  sacred  records.  But  still  the  rationalist 
agreed  with  the  orthodox  supernaturalist  in  admitting  that  there 
was,  at  bottom,  a  basis  of  substantial  truth  in  the  records ;  and 
asserted  that  his  efforts  only  tended  to  free  the  substantive  verity 
from  the  envelopements  of  fable  or  perversion  with  which  tradition 
had  invested  it.  The  admission  was  a  fatal  one.  The  absurdities 
to  which  the  theory  led  could  not  long  remain  undetected.  It  was 
soon  shown,  and  shown  effectually,  that  this  vaunted  criticism  was 
no  criticism  at  all ;  that  the  objections  which  it  offered  to  the  Gos- 
pel history  were  as  old  as  Porphyry,  or,  at  least,  as  the  English 
Deists,  and  had  been  refuted  again  and  again ;  that  the  errors  of 
interpretation  into  which  the  older  expositors  had  fallen  might  be 
avoided  without  touching  the  truth  and  inspiration  of  the  Evan- 
gelists ;  and,  in  a  word,  that  there  could  be  no  medium  between 
open  infidelity  and  the  admission  of  a  supernatural  revelation. 
During  the  first  quarter  of  the  present  century  the  conflict  was 
waged  with  ardour  on  both  sides,  but  with  increasing  energy  on 
the  side  of  truth  ;  and  every  year  weakened  the  forces  of  rational- 
ism. Still,  the  theological  mind  of  Germany  was  to  a  consid- 
erable extent  unsettled:  its  Tholucks  and  Hengstenbergs  stood 
strong  for  orthodoxy ;  its  Twesten  and  Nitszch  applied  the  clear- 
est logic  to  systematic  theology ;  its  Marheineche  and  Daub  phi- 
losophized religiously ;  its  Bretschneider  and  Hase  upheld  reason 
as  the  judge  of  revelation  ;  while  not  a  few  maintained  the  old  ra- 
tionalism, though  with  less  and  less  of  conviction,  or  at  least  of 
boldness. 

It  was  at  this  point  that  Strauss  conceived  the  audacious  idea 
of  applying  the  mythical  theory  to  the  whole  structure  of  the 
Evangelical  history.  All  Germany  has  been  more  or  less  infected 
with  the  mytho-mania,  since  the  new  school  of  archeeologers  have 
gone  so  deeply  into  the  heathen  mythology.  A  mythis  omnis  pris- 
corum  hominum  cum  historia  turn  philosophia  procedit,  says  Heyne  : 
and  Bauer  asks,  logically  enough,  "  if  the  early  history  of  every 
people  is  mythical,  why  not  the  Hebrew  ?"*  The  mere  applica- 
tion of  this  theory  to  the  sacred  records  was  by  no  means  original 
with  Strauss  :  he  himself  points  out  a  number  of  instances  in  which 

•  Strauss,  i.,  §  8. 


xvi  TRANSLATORS'  PREFACE. 

Eichhorn,  Gabler,  Vater,  &c.,  had  made  use  of  it.  His  claim  is 
to  have  given  a  completeness  to  the  theory,  or  rather  to  its  appli- 
cation, which  former  interpreters  had  not  dreamed  of;  and,  to 
tell  the  truth,  he  has  made  no  halting  vi^ork  of  it.  That  Jesus 
lived  ;  that  he  taught  in  Judea  ;  that  he  gathered  disciples,  and  so 
impressed  them  with  his  life  and  teaching  as  that  they  believed 
him  to  be  the  Messiah  ;  this  is  nearly  the  sum  of  historical  truth 
contained  in  the  Evangelists,  according  to  Strauss.  Yet  he  as- 
cribes no  fraudulent  designs  to  the  writers  ;  his  problem  is,  there- 
fore, to  account  for  the  form  in  which  the  narratives  appear ;  and 
this  is  the  place  for  his  theory  to  work.  A  Messiah  was  expect- 
ed ;  certain  notions  were  attached  to  the  Messianic  character  and 
office;  and  with  these  Christ  was  invested  by  his  followers. 
"  Such  and  such  a  thing  must  happen  to  Messiah ;  Jesus  was  the 
Messiah  ;  therefore  such  and  such  a  thing  must  have  happened  to 
him."  "  The  expectation  of  a  Messiah  had  flourished  in  Israel 
long  before  the  time  of  Christ ;  and  at  the  time  of  his  appearance 
it  had  ripened  into  full  bloom  ;  not  an  indefinite  longing  either,  but 
an  expectation  defined  by  many  prominent  characteristics.  Mo- 
ses had  promised  (Deut.,  xviii.,  15)  'a  prophet  like  unto  himself,' 
a  passage  applied,  in  Christ's  time,  to  Messiah  (Acts,  iii.,  22 ;  vii., 
37).  The  Messiah  was  to  spring  of  David's  line,  and  ascend  his 
throne  as  a  second  David  (Matt.,  xxii.,  42 ;  Luke,  i.,  32) ;  and  there- 
fore he  was  looked  for,  in  Christ's  time,  to  be  born  in  the  little 
town  of  Bethlehem  (John,  vii.,  42  ;  Matt.,  ii.,  5).  In  the  old  legends 
the  most  wonderful  acts  and  destinies  had  been  attributed  to  the 
prophets  :  could  less  be  expected  of  the  Messiah  ?  Must  not  his 
life  be  illustrated  by  the  most  splendid  and  significant  incidents 
from  the  lives  of  the  prophets  ?  Finally,  the  Messianic  era,  as  a 
whole,  was  expected  to  be  a  period  of  signs  and  wonders.  The 
eyes  of  the  blind  were  to  be  opened ;  the  deaf  ears  to  be  unstop- 
ped ;  the  lame  were  to  leap,  &c.  (Isa.,  xxxv.,  &c.).  These  ex- 
pressions, part  of  which,  at  least,  were  purely  figurative,  came  to 
be  literally  understood  (Matt.,  xi.,  5  ;  Luke,  vii.,  21,  sqq.)  ;  and  thus, 
even  before  Christ's  appearance,  the  image  of  Messiah  was  con- 
tinually filling  out  with  new  features.  And  thus  many  of  the  le- 
gends respecting  Jesus  had  not  to  be  newly  invented ;  they  exist- 
ed ready-made  in  the  Messianic  hopes  of  the  people,  derived 
chiefly  from  the  Old  Testament,  and  only  needed  to  be  transferred 
to  Christ  and  adapted  to  his  character  and  teachings."* 

*  Strauss,  i.,  $  14. 


TRANSLATORS'  PREFACE.  xvii 

These  extracts  contain  the  substance  of  Strauss's  theory ;  his 
book  is  Httle  more  than  an  application  of  it  to  the  individual  parts 
of  the  history  of  Christ  as  given  in  the  Evangehsts.  A  few  in- 
stances of  his  procedure  will  suffice.  He  finds  the  key  to  the 
miraculous  conception  in  Matt.,  i.,  22 :  "  All  this  was  done  that  it 
might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  of  the  Lord  by  the  prophet, 
saying,"*  &c.  "  The  birth  of  Jesus,  it  was  said,  must  correspond 
to  this  passage  ;  and  what  was  to  be,  they  concluded,  really  did  oc- 
cur, and  so  arose  the  myth."  The  account  of  the  star  of  the  Magi- 
ans,  and  of  their  visit  from  the  East,  arose  from  a  similar  applica- 
tion of  Numbers,  xxiv.,  17;  Psa.  Ixxii.,  10;  Isa.,  Ix.,  l-6,f  &c. 
The  temptation  of  Christ  was  suggested  by  the  trials  of  Job ;  its 
separate  features  helped  out  by  Exod.,  xxxiv.,  28  ;  Lev.,  xvi.,  8, 
10  ;  Deut.,  ix.,  9,J  &c.  The  Transfiguration  finds  a  starting-point 
in  Exod.,  xxxiv.,  29-35.§     So  we  might  go  through  the  book. 

The  appearance  of  the  work,  as  we  have  said,  produced  a  won- 
derful sensation  in  Germany ;  greater,  by  far,  than  its  merits 
would  seem  to  have  authorized.  It  was  the  heaviest  blow  that 
unbelief  had  ever  struck  against  Christianity ;  and  the  question 
was,  what  should  be  done  ?  The  Prussian  government  was  dis- 
posed to  utter  its  ban  against  the  book ;  and  man}^  evangelical 
theologians  deemed  this  the  proper  course  to  pursue  in  regard  to 
it.  But  Dr.  Neander  deprecated  such  a  procedure  as  calculated 
to  give  the  work  a  spurious  celebrity,  and  as  wearing,  at  least,  the 
aspect  of  a  confession  that  it  was  unanswerable.  He  advised  that 
it  should  be  met,  not  by  authority,  but  by  argument,  believing  that 
the  truth  had  nothing  to  fear  in  such  a  conflict.  His  counsel  pre- 
vailed ;  and  the  event  has  shown  that  he  was  right.  Replies  to 
Strauss  poured  forth  in  a  torrent ;  the  Gospel  histories  were  sub- 
jected to  a  closer  criticism  than  ever ;  and  to-day  the  public  mind 
of  Germany  is  nearer  to  an  orthodox  and  evangelical  view  of 
their  contents  than  it  has  been  for  almost  a  century. 

Besides  the  general  impulse  given  by  Strauss  to  the  study  of 
the  Four  Gospels,  he  has  done  theology  another  good  service. 
His  book  has  given  a  deadly  blow  to  rationalism  properly  so 
called.  Its  paltry  criticism  and  beggarly  interpretations  of  Scrip- 
ture are  nowhere  more  eflJectually  dissected  than  in  his  investiga- 
tions of  the  different  parts  of  the  history  and  of  the  expositions 
that  have  been  given  of  it.  In  a  word,  he  has  driven  rationalism 
out  of  the  field  to  make  way  for  his  myths ;  and  Neander,  Eb- 

*  Strauss,  i.,  $  29.  t  Ibid.,  §  36.  X  Ibid.,  $  56.  $  Ibid.,  $  107. 

2 


XTiii  TRANSLATORS-  PREFACE. 

rard,  and  others  have  exploded  the  myths ;  so  that  nothing  re- 
mains but  a  return  to  the  simple,  truthful  interpretations  wliich, 
in  the  main,  are  given  by  the  evangelical  commentators. 

But,  it  may  be  asked,  why  trouble  ourselves  with  controversies 
t)f  this  kind  here  ?  We  cannot  help  it.  Strauss's  book,  at  first, 
could  not  find  a  respectable  publisher  in  England  ;  and  a  garbled 
translation,  containing  its  very  worst  features,  was  put  out  in  a 
cheap  form  for  the  million.  The  same,  or  a  similar  abridgment, 
has  been  circulated  to  a  considerable  extent  in  this  country.  And 
within  the  last  year  a  translation  of  the  whole  work,  from  the 
last  German  edition,  has  been  published  in  London  in  three  hand- 
some volumes.  That  the  soil  of  many  minds  is  ready  to  receive 
its  pestilent  doctrines,  both  in  that  country  and  in  our  own.  is  too 
sadly  true  to  be  denied.  The  Westminster  Review  for  April,  1 847, 
contains  an  article  on  Strauss  and  Parker  which  talks  about  the 
Evangelists  in  the  coolest  strain  of  infidelity  imaginable,  and  refers, 
with  obvious  complacency,  to  the  signs  of"  unbelief  or  illumination*' 
(it  cares  not  which)  that  are  at  present  so  abundant  in  England. 

To  a  certain  extent,  as  we  have  remarked,  Xeander's  Life  of 
Christ  has  a  polemic  aim  against  Strauss.  But  this  is  a  small  part 
of  its  merits  :  indeed,  but  for  the  notes,  an  ordinary  reader  would 
not  detect  any  such  specific  tendency.  It  unfolds  the  life  of  the 
Saviour  from  the  record  with  great  clearness  and  skill ;  it  invests 
the  outline,  thus  obtained,  with  the  fresh  colours  of  life,  without  re- 
sortinsr  to  forced  constructions  and  vain  imaginings :  and.  above 
all,  it  seeks,  with  child-like  humility  and  reverence,  to  learn  and 
exhibit  the  mind  of  the  Spirit.  The  characteristic  of  spirituality, 
so  strongly  stamped  upon  all  the  works  of  this  great  writer,  is  espe- 
cially prominent  here.  None,  we  think,  can  read  the  book  without 
becoming  not  merely  better  acquainted  with  the  facts  of  the  life 
of  Christ,  but  more  anxious  than  ever  to  drink  into  its  spirit. 

At  the  same  time,  it  is  not  to  be  concealed  that  Neander  diflers 
in  his  views  on  some  points  of  doctrine,  as  well  as  of  interpreta- 
tion, from  most  Evangelical  theologians.  We  wish  to  state  dis- 
tinctly that  we  do  not  hold  ourselves  responsible  for  these  pecu- 
liarities of  opinion.  It  was  at  one  time  our  purpose  to  append 
notes  to  such  passages  as  we  deemed  most  objectionable ;  but  af- 
ter mature  deliberation  this  intention  was  laid  aside.  It  is  hardly 
fair  to  criticise  a  man  in  his  own  pages,  even  if  one  is  able  to  do 
it.     The  general  spirit  and  tendency  of  the  work  cannot,  we  are 


TRANSLATORS'  PREFACE.  xix 

sure,  be  otherwise  than  beneficial,  or  we  should  never  have  at- 
tempted to  translate  it.  Its  specific  errors  can  be  met  and  refuted 
elsewhere. 

The  noble  candour  of  Neander  in  the  letter  which  precedes 
this  preface  must  disarm  all  severity.  Let  us  remember,  in  our 
judgment  of  what  may  appear  to  us  even  grave  errors  of  opinion 
in  the  book,  that  its  author  has  fought  for  every  step  of  ground 
that  has  been  gained  of  late  years  by  spiritual  religion  in  Ger- 
many ;  and,  while  we  lament  the  "  dimness"  which  this  great  man 
confesses  with  such  Christian-like  humility,  let  us  acknowledge 
the  grandeur  of  his  idea  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  the  earnest- 
ness of  his  devotion  to  it.  His  starting-point,  and  many  of  his 
paths,  are  different  from  ours  ;  it  must,  therefore,  gladden  our 
hearts,  and  may,  perhaps,  confirm  our  faith,  to  see  that  he  reaches, 
after  all,  the  general  results  of  Evangelical  theology. 

One  word  for  the  translation.  We  have  tried  to  do  our  best ; 
but  we  feel  that  we  have  not  done  very  well.  It  is  hard  to  trans- 
late German  :  and  of  all  German  that  we  have  tried  to  put  into 
intelligible  English,  Xeander's  is  the  hardest.  We  have  not  at- 
tempted a  literal  version  (for  we  want  the  book  to  be  read)  ;  nor, 
on  the  other  hand,  have  we  willingly  gone  into  mere  paraphrase. 
We  have  sought  to  seize  the  sense  of  the  author,  and  to  express 
it  in  our  own  tongue  ;  but  none  can  be  better  assured  than  our- 
selves that  we  have  very  often  failed.  Readers  of  the  original 
work  will  see  that  we  have  taken  some  liberties  with  it  which  de- 
mand explanation.  The  division  of  the  text  into  books,  chapters, 
and  sections  will,  we  hope,  make  the  work  more  intelligible  and 
acceptable  to  English  readers.  In  many  of  the  authors  para- 
phrases of  Scripture  passages  we  have  substituted  the  words  of 
the  Encrlish  version,  where  it  could  be  done  without  affecting  the 
sense  ;  and  many  passages,  also,  to  which  he  had  merely  alluded, 
are  quoted  at  length.  A  few  sentences  have  been  transferred 
from  the  text  to  the  notes ;  and  a  few  passages  of  the  notes,  of 
purely  polemical  interest,  which  would  have  needed  explana- 
tion to  put  them  fairly  before  the  American  public,  have  been 
omitted.  In  all  that  we  have  done,  we  have  endeavoured  to  com- 
ply with  the  spirit  of  Dr.  Xeander's  wishes,  as  kindly  communi- 
cated to  us  by  himself. 

JoRvary  5,  1848, 


XX  TRANSLATORS'  PREFACE. 


LIST  OF  DR.  NEANDER'S  WORKS. 

Das  Leben  Jesu  Chi-isti,  in  seinera  geschiclitliclien  Zusammenliange  und  seiner 
geschichtlichen  Entwickelung:  1"^  Aufl.,  1837;  4^"  Aufl.,  1845  (The  Life  of  Jesus 
Christ,  in  its  Historical  Conuexiou  and  Historical  Developemeut :  1st  ed.,  1837  ;  4th 
ed.,  1845). 

Geschichte  der  Pflanzung  und  Lcitung  der  Christlichen  Kirche  durch  die  Apostel: 
1'*^  Aufl.,  183-2 ;  4'«  Aiifl.,  1847  (Historj-  of  the  Planting  and  Training  of  the  Christian 
Church  by  the  Apostles:  1st  ed.,  1832;  4th  ed.,  1847). 

Allgemeine  Geschichte  der  Christlichen  Religion  und  Kirche  (General  Histoiy  of 
the  Christian  Religion  and  Church). 

(a)  Die  drei  ersten  Jalirhunderte :  l«e  Aufl.  in  3  Banden  ;  2te  Aufl.  in  2  Bd.,  1843-43.     (The  three 
first  centuries :  1st  edition  in  3  volumes,  1825  ;  2d  editiou  in  2  vols.,  1842-43.) 

(b)  Das  4te-6te  Jahrhundert :  Ite  Aufl.  in  drei  Banden,  1&28 ;  2te  Aufl.  in  2  Bd.,  18 16-47.     (Fourth 
to  sixth  century :  1st  ed.  in  3  vols.,  1828 ;  2d  in  2  vols.,  18415-47.) 

(c)  Cte-8te,  in  1  Bd.     (Sixth  to  eighth,  1  vol.),  1834. 

(d)  Ste-llf,  m  1  Bd.     (Eighth  to  eleventh,  1  vol.),  183G. 

(e)  llte-l3w,  in  2  Banden.     (Eleventh  to  thirteenth,  2  vols.),  1841  and  1845. 

Ueber  den  Kaiser  Julianus  und  seiu  Zeitalter  (The  Emperor  Juliau  and  his  Times), 
1812. 

Genetische  Entwickelung  der  vornehmstcn  Gnostischen  Systeme  (Genetical  Devel- 
opement  of  the  jiriucipal  Gnostic  Systems),  1818. 

Anti-Gnosticus.  Geist  des  Tertullianus  und  Einleitung  in  desscn  Schriften  (Anti- 
Gnosticus.     Genius  of  Tertiillian  and  Litroduction  to  his  Writings),  1825. 

Der  heilige  Chrysostomus  und  die  Kirche  in  dessen  Zeitalter,  2  Bd.,  1820  ;  2'*=  Aufl. 
1'^  Bd.,  1832  (Chrysostom  and  the  Church  iu  his  Times,  2  vols.,  1820  ;  2d  ed.  of  1st. 
vol.,  1832). 

Der  heilige  Benahard  und  sein  Zeitalter  (Bernard  and  his  Times),  1813. 

Denkwiirdigkeiten  aus  der  Geschichte  des  Christenthums  und  des  Christlichen 
Lebens:  1'^  Aufl.  in  3  Bd.,  1822;  3**=  Aufl.  in  2  Bd.,  1845-46  (Memorabilia  from  the 
Historj-  of  Christianity  and  the  Chri.slian  Life  :  1st  ed.  3  vols.,  1822;  3d  ed.  2  vols., 
1845-46). 

Kleine  Gelegenheitschriften  praktisch-Christlichen,  vornehmlich  exegetischen  und 
historischen  Inhalts,  3"-'  Aufl.,  1829  (Smaller  Treatises,  chiefly  exegetical  and  historical, 
3d  ed.,  1829). 

Das  Eine  und  das  Mannichfaltigc  des  Christlichen  Lebens;  Eine  Reihe  kleiner 
Gelegenlieitschriften,  grossertentheils  biographischen  Lihalts  (Series  of  smaller  Treat- 
ises, chiefly  biographical),  1840. 

Das  Priucip  der  Reformation,  oder  Staupitz  und  Luther  (The  Principle  of  the  Ref- 
ormation ;  or  Staupitz  and  Luther),  1840. 


PREFACE 


THE    FIRST    EDITION. 


I\  the  Preface  to  my  Representation  of  the  Christian  Religion 
and  Church  in  the  Apostolic  Age,  I  assigned  my  reasons  for  the 
separate  publication  of  that  work,  and  stated  its  relations  to  my 
General  History  of  the  Church.  It  remained  for  me  to  treat  of 
that  which  formed  the  ground  of  the  manifestation  and  existence 
of  the  Apostolical  Church  itself,  viz.,  the  Life  and  Ministry  of  the 
Divine  Founder  of  the  Church  ;  and  I  have,  moreover,  been  urged 
from  many  quarters  to  execute  this  necessary  portion  of  my  work. 
I  was  made  to  pause  in  the  former  undertaking  by  the  lofty  sa- 
credness  of  the  subject  and  its  many  difficulties  ;  how  much  more, 
then,  in  the  latter  !  But  the  signs  of  the  times  (to  which,  as  a  his- 
torian of  the  Church,  I  could  not  but  take  heed),  the  uncertainty 
of  human  affairs,  and  the  opportunity  afforded  by  a  pause  in  my 
General  History,  have  overcome  my  scruples,  and  led  me,  trusting 
in  God,  to  go  on  with  this  work. 

Yet  well  may  he  hesitate  who  undertakes  to  write  the  life  of 
Cfirist!  "Who,  indeed  (as  Herder  finely  answered  Lavater), 
could  venture,  after  John,  to  write  the  life  of  Christ  ?"*  Who 
will  not  agree  with  Anna  Maria  von  Schurmann,  that  such  an 
attempt  is  "to  paint  the  sun  with  charcoal :  the  life  of  a  Christian 
is  the  best  picture  of  the  life  of  Christ  ?"t 

Yet  why  should  not  history  (though  assured  that  its  description 
must  be  far  behind  the  reality)  occupy  itself  with  the  highest  man- 
ifestation that  has  appeared  in  humanity — a  manifestation  which 
sanctifies,  but  does  not  spurn,  the  labours  of  men  ?     The  artist,  in- 

*  '•  7  write  the  life  of  Christ—/?  Never.  The  Evangelists  have  written  it  as  it  cau 
and  ought  to  be  written.  Let  ns,  however,  not  write  it,  but  become  it  ?"  (Beitraee  zur  n;i- 
heren  Kenntuiss  Lavater's,  von  Ulrich  Hegener:  Leips.,  1836.)  May  the  good  Zurichers, 
who  have  lately  shown  themselves  so  worthy  of  their  sires  in  their  resistance  to  revolution- 
Kry  violence  and  their  enthusiasm  for  the  faith  (dogma  Christiannm-  dogma  popiilare,  Au- 
gostin.  opus  impeif.  e.  Julian,  ii.,  2),  erect  a  Christian  national  memorial  by  an  edition,  as 
coniplete»as  possible,  of  Lavater's  correspondence. 

t  Cf.  Reinhard,  Plan  Jesu,  1  ;  Heubnpr'«  A^m. 


xxii  PREFACE. 

spired  by  devotion,  paints  a  picture  of  Christ  without  any  aid  from 
history,  merely  from  intuition  of  the  idea  of  Christ.  But  we  have 
the  lineaments  of  the  historical  Christ,  in  fragments  at  least ;  and 
there  is  wanting  only  insight  into  their  connexion  to  frame  them 
into  a  harmonious  whole.  We  feel  the  necessity  of  calling  up 
vividly  before  our  minds,  in  our  own  stage  of  life  and  scientific 
progress,  this  realized  Ideal,  which  belongs  to  all  ages  ;  and  at 
pai'ticular  epochs  in  the  mutations  of  time  this  necessity  is  always 
felt  anew.  The  image  of  Christ,  not  of  yesterday  nor  to-day, 
ever  renews  its  youth  among  men,  and,  as  the  world  grows  old, 
penetrates  it  with  a  heaven-tending  youthful  vigour.  What  Pno- 
Tius  says  of  the  various  ideas  of  Christ  among  different  nations 
may  be  applied  to  different  periods  of  time,  viz.,  "that  each,  by  a 
new  representation,  must  make  itself  familiar  with  the  image  of 
Christ."  Obviously,  however,  the  peculiarities  of  different  periods 
must  be  distinguished.  Some  periods  mark  a  new  creation  in  the 
Christian  Church  and  in  humanity,  as  already  appeared ;  others, 
by  dissolution  and  crisis,  prepare  the  way  for  it.  Our  age  belongs 
to  the  latter  class :  we  stand  between  the  old  world  and  a  new 
one  to  be  called  into  being  by  the  ever  old  and  ever  new  Gospel. 
For  the  fourth  time  Christianity  is  preparing  a  new  epoch  in  the 
life  of  humanity.  Our  labors  can  only  be  preparatory  to  that  new 
creation,  when,  after  the  regeneration  of  life  and  science,  the  great 
acts  of  God  shall  be  proclaimed  with  new  tongues  of  fire  !* 

But  it  may  be  questioned,  also,  whether  it  is  possible,  from  the 
authorities  in  our  hands,  to  exhibit  a  connected  description  of  the 
life  of  Christ  ?  Christian  consciousness  will  be  satisfied  with  no- 
thing less  than  an  intuition  of  Christ's  life  as  a  whole  ;  and,  there- 
fore, science  must  undertake  to  free  it  from  all  alloy,  and  to  found  it 
on  a  substantial  basis.  It  is  by  means  of  the  Christian  conscious- 
ness that  we  feel  ourselves  allied  to  all  Christianity  since  the  out- 
pouring of  the  Holy  Ghost — Christian  consciousness,  the  living 
source  from  which  every  thing  in  life  and  science,  which  has 
really  enriched  the  Church,  has  proceeded  and  must  proceed  :  a 
far  different  thing  from  the  changeful  culture  of  the  day,  which, 
without  it,  must  ever  be  ephemeral  and  transitory.  To  serve  this 
last  is  the  most  wretched  of  servitudes.  It  is,  indeed,  time  for  a 
new  beginning  of  Biblical  criticism,  of  New  Testament  exegesis. 

*  Most  keenly  does  tlie  author  feci  (as  did  liis  late  friend,  5.  Jacobi,  wlio  lias  left  behind 
him  a  blessed  and  boiionrcd  nienioiy)  that  liis  work  bears  the  marks  of  its  prodaction  in  an 
age  of  crisis,  of  isolation,  of  pain,  and  of  throes. 


PREFACE.  xxiii 

of  inquiries  into  the  formation  of  the  canon.  There  are  great  dif- 
ficulties, indeed,  especially  in  the  chronology,*  in  the  work  which 
we  have  to  do.  But  this,  instead  of  deterring,  must  only  stimu- 
late us  to  greater  efforts.  We  must  only  guard  against  relinquish- 
ing our  hopes  too  hastily,  and  keep  aloof  from  all  prejudices  either 
of  antiquity  or  novelty ;  and  then  this  undertaking  may  be  one  of 
the  preparations,  however  trifling,  for  a  new  epoch  in  this  part  of 
history. 

As  for  those  who  deny  that  our  field  is  properly  historical,  and 
place  it  in  a  pre-historical  and  mythical  region,  I  need  say  nothing 
here,  as  I  have  sought  to  refute  them  in  the  course  of  the  work 
itself 

In  regard  to  my  relations  to  the  various  theological  parties  of 
the  age,  I  must  refer  to  the  Preface  to  the  first  volume  of  my 
"Apostolic  Age;"  and  to  my  letter  to  Dewar,  chaplain  to  the 
British  Embassy  in  Hamburg.  Whatever  appears  to  me  to  be 
true,  or  most  probable,  after  candid  and  earnest  inquiry,  with 
ail  reverence  for  the  sacredness  of  the  subject,  I  utter,  without 
looking  at  consequences.  Whoever  has  a  good  work  to  do  must, 
as  Luther  says,  let  the  devil's  tongue  run  as  it  pleases.  There 
are  two  opposite  parties  whom  I  cannot  hope  to  please,  viz.,  those 
who  will  forcibly  make  all  things  new,  and  fancy,  in  their  folly, 
that  they  can  shake  the  rock  which  ages  could  not  undermine; 
and  those  who  would  retain,  and  forcibly  reintroduce,  even  at  the 
expense  of  all  genuine  love  of  truth,  every  thing  that  is  old  ;  nay. 
even  the  worn-out  and  the  obsolete.  I  shall  not  please  those  hy- 
percritics  who  subject  the  sacred  writings  to  an  arbitrary  subtil- 
ty,  at  once  superrational  and  sophistical ;  nor  those,  on  the  other 
hand,  who  believe  that  here  all  criticism — or  at  least  all  ci'iticism 
on  internal  grounds — cometh  of  evil.  Both  these  tendencies  are 
alike  at  variance  with  a  healthful  sense  for  truth  and  conscientious 
devotion  to  it ;  both  are  alike  inimical  to  genuine  culture.  There 
is  need  of  criticism  where  any  thing  is  communicated  to  us  in  'the 
form  of  a  historical  tradition  in  written  records  ;  and  I  am  sure 
that  an  impartial  criticism,  applied  to  the  Scriptures,  is  not  only 
consistent  with  that  child-like  faith  without  which  thei-e  can  be  no 
Christianity  or  Christian  theology,-)-  but  is  necessary  to  a  just 

*  Wherever  I  have  not  sure  grounds  for  decision,  I  say  "  perhaps  :"  nor  am  I  ashamed 
of  it,  unfashionable  as  "  perhaps"  is,  nowadays,  in  matters  of  science.  Would  that  our 
young  votaries  of  science  would  lay  to  heart  the  excellent  words  of  Niebuhk,  on  the  de- 
grees of  confidence,  in  the  "  Lebensnachrichten,"  ii.,  208. 

t  But  the  theologian  must  have  more  than  a  merely  critical  mind  and  critical  aims  :  he 


xxiv  PREFACE. 

acuteness*  and  profoundness  of  thought,  as  well  as  to  that  true 
consecration  of  mind  which  is  so  essential  to  theology.  The  child- 
like faith  of  the  theologian  who  cannot  violently  rid  himself  of  the 
critical  element  of  his  times  or  of  human  nature,  is  thus  proved, 
as  it  were,  in  the  fire  of  temptation ;  this  is  the  tentatio  (particu- 
larly in  this  age  of  scientific  struggle)  which  must  go  along  with 
oraiio  and  ?neditatio,  in  the  depths  of  the  earnest  and  humble 
spirit.  Without  this  priestly  consecration,  there  can  be  no  theol- 
ogy. It  thrives  best  in  the  calmness  of  a  soul  consecrated  to  God. 
What  grows  amid  the  noisy  bustle  of  the  world  and  the  empty 
babble  of  the  age  is  not  theology. 

God  reveals  himself  in  his  word  as  he  does  in  his  works.  In 
both  we  see  a  se\f-revealing,  seU-concealing  God,  who  makes  him- 
self known  only  to  those  who  earnestly  seek  him  ;-j-  in  both  we 
find  stimulants  to  faith  and  occasions  for  unbelief;  in  both  we  find 
contradictions  whose  higher  harmony  is  hidden  except  from  him 
who  gives  up  his  whole  mind  in  reverence  ;  in  both,  in  a  word,  it 
is  the  law  of  revelation  that  the  hecwt  of  man  should  be  tested  in 
receiving  it ;  and  that,  in  the  spiritual  life  as  well  as  in  the  bodily, 
man  must  eat  his  bread  in  the  sweat  of  his  hrow. 

Berlin,  July  18,  1837. 

needs  a  spiritual  mind,  a  deep  acquaintance  with  divine  thins^s  ;  and  lie  must  study  the 
Scriptures  with  his  heart  as  well  as  head,  unless  he  wishes  his  theology  to  be  robbed  of  its 
salt  by  his  criticism. 

*  Not  too  sharp,  so  as  to  be  notched. 

t  This  is  the  pervading  thought  of  Pascal  (the  sage  for  all  centuries)  in  his  Pcnsees, 
though  blended  with  many  errors  of  Catholicism  and  absolute  Predestination.  Great 
thanks  are  due  to  Fau^ere  for  the  edition  of  this  work  (I8H)  in  its  original  form. 


PREFACE 


THE    THIRD    EDITION 


The  reception  of  this  work  among  the  opposing  theological 
parties  of  the  age  has  been  such  as  I  anticipated  in  the  Preface  to 
the  first  edition.  It  is,  therefore,  the  less  necessary  for  me  to  vin- 
dicate myself  against  special  accusations  on  any  side.  1  am  sat- 
isfied that  the  principles  of  my  theological  procedure  are  in  the 
main  correct,  and  that  their  claims  will  finally  be  justified.  To 
answer  the  revilings  or  false  inferences  of  fanatical  prejudice  on 
either  hand,  or  to  enter  into  purely  personal  controversy,  forais 
no  part  of  my  purpose.  Yet,  in  order  to  leave  no  room  for  doubt 
as  to  my  own  theological  stand-point,  it  appears  necessary  that  I 
should  notice  a  few  of  the  opinions  that  have  been  passed  upon 
the  work. 

A  review  from  the  pen  of  Consistorial  Counsellor  Schulz 
has  appeared  in  the  Allgemeine  Darmst'ddtische  Kirclienzeitung, 
which  opposes  me  merely  by  dictatorial  decisions;  and,  by  isola- 
ting various  passages*  of  my  work  from  their  connexion,  ascribes 
to  me  opinions  which  are  foreign  to  my  whole  theological  system. 
What  I  say  will  not  be  disputed  by  any  one  who  candidly  exam- 
ines that  review  and  compares  it  with  my  work.  I  have  called 
the  attention  of  my  readers  in  this  edition  to  these  perversions  of 
my  words  ;  perversions  in  which  Sciiulz  shakes  hands  with  men  of 
a  school  directly  opposite  to  his  own.  Were  I  not  satisfied  of  his 
integrity,  I  should  be  under  the  necessity  of  calling  them  dishonest 
perversions  ;  as  tlie  case  is,  I  see  in  them  only  the  prejudice  of 
that  enthusiasm  of  reason  so  admirably  characterized  by  Jacobi  in 
his  remarks  upon  "Reason  which  is  not  Reason"  (ii,,  492).  Of 
those  who  are  enslaved  by  this  enthusiasm,  he  says  :  "  Their  belief 
is  always  reason,  nor  can  they  recognize  another's  reason  except 
in  his  belief.     They  inquire  not  how  he  feels,  perceives,  observes, 

*  The  reviewer  has  been  able  to  point  out  but  one  oversight — certaiuly  uo  proof  of  care- 
less haste  in  a  work  on  such  a  subject.  The  mistake  was  one  which  might  have  happened 
to  any  one  in  an  unlucky  moment,  which  could  not  fail  to  be  noticed  by  any  one,  and  which, 
in  fact,  was  noticed  by  myself  as  soon  as  I  glanced  again  at  the  passage. 


xxvi  PREFACE. 

or  infers,  but  only  what  liis  opinions  are  — whether  they  agree 
with  their  canon  or  not ;  and  that  decides  the  matter."  This 
stand-point  as  surely  generates  a  prejudice  which  precludes  all 
just  judgment  of  the  opinions  of  others,  and  leads  (though  uncon- 
sciously) to  falsehood,  as  does  the  enthusiasm  for  an  absolute  sys- 
tem of  doctrines  which  lays  down,  as  a  standard,  a  definite  num- 
ber of  articles  of  faith,  or  principles  therewith  connected,  and 
makes  this  standard  a  criterion  of  every  one's  claim  to  Christian- 
ity. In  the  judgments  formed  of  my  work,  as  well  as  in  manv 
other  matters  of  our  time,  these  two  sets  of  prejudices  have  led 
to  similar  results. 

"  What,"  inquires  Schulz  several  times,  "  will  the  believers  in 
creeds  say  to  this  V  Now,  as  to  the  opinion  of  this  or  that  set  of 
men,  I  am  indifferent ;  it  concerns  me  only  to  know  how  far  mv 
statements  accord  with  truth,  especially  Christian  truth.  It  is 
proper  that  I  should  say,  however,  that  I  go  along  with  those  w^ho 
oppose  "  creed-believers"  (to  use  Schulz's  term)  so  far  as  this, 
viz.,  that  I  could  not  subscribe  to  any  of  the  existing  symbols  (ex- 
cept the  Apostles'  creed,  which  testifies  to  those  fundamental  facts 
of  Christianity  that  are  essential  to  the  existence  of  the  Christian 
Church)  as  an  unconditional  expression  of  my  religious  convic- 
tions. 

I  believe  that  our  path  lies,  through  the  strifes  and  storms  of  the 
present  time,  to  a  new  creation  in  the  Church,  w^hen  the  same 
Holy  Spirit*  that  works  in  the  life  of  the  Church,  and  produces 
all  truly  Christian  creeds  as  expressions  (defective,  indeed,  as  all 
human  representations  of  the  Divine  must  be,  and  stamped  with 
the  varying  culture  of  the  time)  of  Christian  truth,  will  produce 
a  syrpbol  adapted  to  the  new  stage  of  the  Church's  developement, 
if  it  become  necessary  that  such  an  expression  of  the  animatini:^ 
faith  of  the  Church  be  given  in  a  new  literal  form.  But  I  go 
along  with  the  theologians  (so  called  creed-believers)  in  what  I 
believe  to  be  the  fundamental  principle  of  the  Reformation  and  of 
the  Evangelical  Church  ;  the  doctrines,  viz.,  of  the  corruption  of 
human  nature  (not,  however,  excluding,  but  presupposing,  an  ele- 
ment of  affinity  for  God  [Gottverwnndte]  in  human  nature):  nnd 

*  The  Holy  Spirit  going  out  from  faith  in  Clwist,  who  was  crucified  for  the  sins  of  men, 
who  truly  rose  from  the  dead  and  ascended  to  heaven ;  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  lias  proved 
itself  the  same  since  the  first  Christian  Pentecost,  at  all  times,  among  nil  people,  learne-i 
or  unlearned  ;  not  the  chanceful  spirit  of  ihe  times,  which  corresponds  more  nearly  to  what 
is  called  in  the  New  Testament  the  spirit  of  the  world,  and  whose  manifestntions  slan.i 
opposed  to  those  of  the  Holy  Si))rit. 


PREFACE.  xxvii 

of  justification  by  faith  in  Jesus  as  the  Redeemer.  The  essential 
part  of  the  Evangelical  Confession  (the  Augsburg  Confession  and 
its  Apology),  so  far  as  it  is  an  exposition  of  this  doctrine,  togeth- 
er with  the  unchangeable  verities  to  w^hich  the  Apostles'  Creed 
bears  witness,  seem  to  me  the  irrefragable  basis  of  the  Evan- 
gelical Church;  which,  on  this  basis, protests  against  all  popery, 
whether  the  Roman  or  any  other  impure  spirit  of  the  age  ;  against 
human  statutes,  no  matter  of  what  kind.  Dr.  Schulz  reproaches 
me  for  speaking  of  the  sinfulness  of  human  nature.  On  the  other 
hand,  I  cannot  but  be  astonished  that  this  truth,  so  clearly  re- 
vealed in  the  Scriptures,  nay,  lying  at  their  basis,  and  so  plainly 
written  upon  every  human  heart,  should  be  denied  by  any  man. 
He  wishes,  moreover,  that  the  terms  "  natural  reason"  and  "  self- 
righteousness"  may  hereafter  not  appear  in  my  writings.  In  this 
respect  I  cannot  possibly  gratify  him.  These  terms  have  a  well- 
. established  right  in  the  Evangelical  Church ;  the  conceptions 
which  they  express  are  closely  connected  with  its  fundamental 
principle  ;  they  are,  moreover,  firmly  founded  in  Biblical  Anthro- 
pology.* They  are  not  the  offshoot  of  a  "  new  Evangelical" 
Theology,  but  of  an  old  Evangelical  faith.  It  is  a  mere  pretended 
"enlightenment"  (which,  notwithstanding  it  may,  by  destroying, 
prepare  the  way  for  better  things,  is  yet  in  its  positive  elements  a 
source  of  darkness)  that  can  object  to  those  conceptions. 

I  have  to  thank  Dr.  Hase  for  the  kindness  with  which  he  has 
spoken  of  my  work  in  the  Jalirhudier  far  ivlssenschaftliche  Kri- 
tik;  but  it  would  take  more  space  than  a  preface  will  allow  to 
come  to  an  understanding  with  him  upon  the  points  in  Apologet- 
ics and  Dogmatics  on  which  he  touches  in  his  review.  I  can  only 
remark,  that  a  description  of  the  life  of  Christ  (although  it  tnust 
proceed  from  the  Christian  consciousness,  which  alone  can  afford 
a  living  intuition  of  it)  does  not  necessarily  demand  for  its  found- 
ation a  complete  and  well-defined  theory  of  the  person  of  Christ. 
On  the  contrary,  it  would  be  one  of  the  excellences  of  such  a 

*  It  is  a  trick  oi' Jesuitism  (wl:icli  is  by  no  means  confined  to  one  form,  but  often  assumes 
tlie  shaoe  of  the  fanaticism  of  reason  or  understanding)  to  protest  I'm  form)  against  the  ten- 
dencies of  the  journal  called  the  Evangdische  Kirekeuzciluiig-,  while,  in  fact,  the  protest  is 
not  meant  to  bear  against  those  tendencies — not  against  antiquated  dogmas — biit  against 
the  unchangeable  fundamental  truths  of  the  Church  of  Christ;  traths  which  can  appear  to 
be  antiquated  dogmas  only  to  the  shallow  and  superiicial  spirit  of  the  times  ;  a  spirit  as 
contracted  as  it  is  conceited.  At  the  same  time,  it  cannot  be  denied  that  the  one-sided- 
ness,  the  exaggerations  and  multiform  sickliness  of  the  tendencies  referred  to  may  have 
contributed  to  produce  a  reaction.  We  say  this  sine  ira  et  studio,  with  a  full  sense  of  the 
sincere  and  earnest  zeal,  and  the  true  Christian  endeavours  and  residts  of  those  tenden- 
cies wliich  find  an  organ  in  the  Kirchcnzeilung. 


xxviii  PREFACE. 

work,  that  various  doctrinal  tendencies  (if  supranaturalistic)  could 
be  satisfied  with  it.  It  must  deal  with  facts,  which  are  more 
weighty  than  men's  conceptions,  changeful  as  they  are.  All  dog- 
matical theories  except  those  which  are  willing  to  do  violence  to 
history  must  agree  in  acknowledging  certain  facts.  What  I  havo 
said  of  the  human  developement  of  the  life  of  Christ  harmonizes 
well  with  the  consequent  doctrine  of  a  status  exinanitionis ;  with- 
out this,  in  fact,  the  human  life  of  Christ  can  have  no  reality.  As 
to  my  views  of  the  Ascension,  I  must  adhere  to  them,  until  I  can 
be  convinced  that  without  them  the  full  import  of  Christ's  resur- 
rection can  be  asserted.  Nor  is  it  simply  strength  of  faith  that 
leads  me  to  these  results  ;  from  the  beginning  my  religious  lifo 
has  been  too  much  affected  by  the  culture  of  this  age  to  allow  me 
to  glory  in  such  a  faith — to  compare  myself  with  those  men  of 
child-like  simplicity,  those  heroes  whose  Divine  confidence  is  ex- 
alted above  all  doubt.*  I  have  adopted  them  from  consecutive 
reasoning  upon  the  principles  of  the  Christian  faith.  There  is  no 
middle  ground  here ;  unless,  indeed,  in  order  to  avoid  admitting 
a  limit  to  all  explanation,  without,  at  the  same  time,  affirming  the 
opposite,  we  cover  up  the  difficulty  in  phrases  and  formulas. 

To  all  those  who  consider  the  Socratic  ignorance  as  folly,  and 
who  have  settled  beforehand  the  highest  questions — questions 
whose  right  answers  the  great  Melancthon  placed  among  the 
beatitudes  of  the  intuition  of  a  better  life — my  dogmatical  system 
must  appear  weak  and  unsatisfactor3\ 

In  the  reviewer  of  my  work  in  the  Halle  Literalurzeitung 
(C^hurch-counsellor  Schwarz  of  Jena),  I  am  happy  to  recognize  a 
worthy  man,  who  can  acknowledge  with  congenial  spirit,  even 
amid  differences  of  opinion,  the  work  of  an  earnest  mind  and  of 
serious  study— a  phenomenon  every  day  becoming  rarer  in  tliis 
age  of  selfish  and  excited  party  spirit.  I  am  gratified,  though 
not  surprised,  to  find,  from  the  beautiful  notice  of  my  book  by  Dr. 
LiicKR,  that  that  old  and  worthy  friend  agrees  with  me  in  a'll  es- 
sential points. 

To  find  ourselves  at  one  in  the  recognition  of  certain  trutlis 
with  men  whom  we  must  admire  and  honour  on  many  accounts, 
even  though  our  convictions,  on  important  subjects,  may  be  op-' 
posed  to  each  other,  cannot  be  otherwise  than  gratifying.     I  have 

•  Truth  before  all  things     I  would  not  scent  to  be  what  I  am  not.     Tiiis  book,  which  coul.i 
oidy  have  aiNsen  in  this  age  of  strife  and  discord,  is  itself  a  mirror  of  the  progress  of  my 


PREFACE.  xxix 

no  sympathy  with  that  narrowness  of  maid  which  refuses  to  do 
justice  to  the  advocate,  however  able,  of  opinions  which  we  our- 
selves must  reject.  That  is  an  unworthy  arrogance  which,  in  its 
zealous  defence  of  a  holy  cause  (a  cause  which,  above  all  others 
breathes  humility,  and  teaches  us  more  and  more  that  all  our 
knowledge  is  but  fragmentary),  deems  itself  authorized  to  look 
down  haughtily  upon  its  opponent,  however  superior  in  scientific 
ability ;  or  even  seeks  to  cover  the  weakness  of  its  own  argu- 
ments by  what  is  intended,  according  to  the  sickly  taste  of  the 
age,  to  pass  for  wit  and  humour. 

I  cannot,  therefore,  but  rejoice  to  find  that  my  treatment  of  the 
subject,  with  that  of  others  engaged  in  the  same  controversy,  has 
induced  Dr.  Strauss  to  soften  down  his  mythical  theory  of  the 
Ufe  of  Christ  in  various  points,  and  to  acknowledge  the  truth  of 
several  results  arrived  at  by  my  historical  inquiries.  In  his  pub- 
lic acknovvdedgment  of  this  I  recognize  a  candour  and  love  of  truth 
which  is  far  more  honourable  than  mere  intellectual  greatness. 
At  the  same  time,  I  am  grateful  to  him  for  the  kindness  with  which 
he  lias  spoken  of  me  personally.  A  certain  degree  of  harmony, 
then,  may  be  attained  by  the  application  of  those  fundamental 
principles  of  historical  criticism  which  all  sound  thinkers  must  ac- 
knowledge to  be  correct.  Yet  it  is  only  a  certain  degree ;  it  is 
easy  to  be  understood  how  the  harmony  thus  reached  is  inter- 
rupted by  the  wider  difierences  which  lie  at  the  foundation  of  the 
subject. 

The  chief  points  of  controversy  turn  upon  essential  differences 
of  religious  thought  and  feeling.  These  fundamental  differences 
are  clearly  set  forth  by  Dr.  Strauss  in  the  closing  dissertation  of 
his  third  edition,  and  in  his  essay  on  the  Permanent  and  the  Tran- 
sitory {das  Bleihende  und  Verg'dngliche)  in  Christianity.  They  are 
to  be  found  chiefly  in  opposing  viev/s  of  the  relation  of  God  to  the 
world,  of  the  personality  of  spirit,  of  the  relation  between  the 
here  and  the  hereafter,  and  of  the  nature  of  sin.  The  contro- 
versy, to  our  mind,  does  not  lie  between  an  old  and  a  new  view 
of  Christianity,  but  between  Christianity  and  a  human  invention 
directly  opposed  to  it.  It  is  nothing  less  than  a  struggle  between 
Christian  Theism  and  a  system  of  world-  and  self-deification. 
This  system  (by  a  relative  historical  necessity)  had  to  unfold  it- 
self in  theological  and  philosophical  rationalism,  in  order  to  be 
overthrown  by  the  power  of  Christian  truth  in  the  natural  prog- 
ress of  life  and  thought.     Symptoms  of  it  can  be  detected  in  the 


XXX  PREFACE. 

sects  of  the  ^Middle  Ages,  and  in  many  of  the  manifestations  that 
preceded  the  Reformation  ;  and  it  would  have  broken  forth  at  all 
earher  period,  had  not  the  EvangeUcal  enthusiasm  of  the  Refor- 
mation suppressed  it  for  a  time.  We  may  apply  here  the  words 
of  Melan'cthon,  uttei'ed,  with  his  deep  historical  insight,  in  a  con- 
nexion akin  to  this:  Dogmatuni  semina,  quce  longe graviora  tuinul- 
tus  aliquando  excitatura  fuerant,  nisi  Lictherus  exortus  esset  ac  stu- 
dia  hominufn  alio  ti'axisset  (Corpus  Reformator.,  tom.  i.,  f.  1083). 
Far  be  it  from  me  to  judge  the  heart  of  any  man  ;  in  this  regard 
each  must  be  his  own  accuser.  A  man  that  knows  he  serves  a 
truth  above  the  range  of  the  human  mind  knows,  at  the  same 
time,  how  far  below  it  he  himself  stands,  and  how  high,  on  the 
other  hand,  others,  whose  individual  culture  modified  by  the  spirit 
of  the  age  may  liave  laid  them  open  to  error,  may  in  heart  be 
raised  above  their  error.  Whoever  has  entered  into  the  struggles 
of  his  age  will  be  willing,  at  the  same  time  that  he  judges  himself, 
to  be  mild  in  his  judgments  of  others,  who,  although  they  may 
have  been  further  carried  away  by  those  same  struggles,  have 
preserved  a  seemly  and  becoming  moderation.  It  is  ihe principle 
alone  that  is  in  question,  and  that  cannot  be  judged  too  strictly. 

I  conclude  with  the  golden  words  of  one  of  the  greatest  men 
of  modern  times  in  testimony  of  the  truth,  and  in  opposition,  not 
only  to  the  vain  attempt  to  amalgamate  Christianity  with  the 
])rinciple  of  modern  ;/</i--culture,  but  also  to  the  spirit  which  seeks 
to  reduce  all  minds  to  one  mode  of  doctrinal  conception — to  the 
stand-point  which  strives  to  make  the  piece-work  of  human  knowl- 
edge absolute.  "  The  man  who  does  not  hold  Christ's  earthly 
life,  with  all  its  miracles,  to  be  as  properly  and  really  historical  as 
any  event  in  the  sphere  of  history,  and  who  does  not  receive  all 
points  of  the  Apostolic  Creed  with  the  fullest  conviction,  I  do  not 
conceive  to  be  a  Protestant  Christian.  And  as  for  that  Christian- 
ity which  is  such  according  to  the  fashion  of  the  modern  philoso- 
phers and  Pantheists,  without  a  personal  God,  without  immortal- 
ity, without  an  individuality  of  man,  without  historical  faith — it 
may  be  a  very  ingcn'ous  and  s\.\h\\e  philosophy,  but  it  is  no  Chris- 
tianity at  all.  Again  and  again  have  I  said  that  I  know  not  what 
to  do  with  a  metaphysical  God  ;  and  that  I  will  have  no  other  but 
the  God  of  the  Bible,  who  is  heart  to  heart.  Whoever  can  recon- 
cile the  metaphysical  God  with  the  God  of  the  Bible,  may  try  it, 
and  write  symbolical  books  to  suit  all  ages  ;  but  he  who  admits  the 
absolute  inexplicability  of  the  main  point,  which  can  only  be  ap- 


PREFACE.  xxxi 

proached  by  asymptotes,  will  never  grieve  at  the  impossibility  of 
possessing  any  system  of  religion."*  May  the  man  who,  with  rare 
world-historical  insight,  was  able  to  explain  the  signs  of  the  times, 
be  heard  of  many  ! 

Berlin,  May  Q,  1839. 

*  Lcbeii  Niebuhr's,  Thl.  ii.,  344.     We  cannot  be  too  grateful  to  the  publishers  for  put- 
ting forth  this  treasure  of  sound  feeling  and  profound  truth. 


PREFACE 

TO 

THE    FOURTH    EDITION. 


1  HAVE  sought,  in  this  fourth  edition,  to  improve,  as  far  as  I 
could,  both  the  matter  and  form  of  the  work ;  but  do  not  deem  it 
necessary  to  add  any  thing  to  what  has  been  said  in  former  pref- 
aces upon  my  mode  of  treating  the  subject.  I  have  thought  it 
best,  in  spite  ©f  a  desire  to  economize  space,  to  repubhsh  those 
prefaces ;  adding  here  and  there  a  remark  called  for  by  the  rela- 
tions of  the  times,  which  I  should  have  otherwise  put  into  a  separ- 
ate preface.  Although  I  would  willingly  have  buried  in  oblivion 
the  unpleasant  personal  allusions  (contained  in  the  second  pref- 
ace) to  a  man  whom  I  honour  and  esteem,  I  have  considered  it 
necessary  to  republish  it,  in  view  of  the  truths  which  it  contains, 
and  their  bearing  upon  the  times. 

And  now  let  my  book,  with  the  blessing  of  God,  enter  anew 
among  the  strifes  of  the  age  :  standing  in  the  midst  of  which,  I 
shall  not  suffer  myself  to  be  shaken  or  perplexed  b)^  the  "  rd  sv 
Hi.a(x)  d[i,(j)07epo)d£v  KreiveTai." 

A.  Neander. 

Berlin,  3d  August,  1815. 


CONTENTS. 


INTRODUCTION. 

CHAPTER  I. 

THE    IDEA    OF    THE    HISTORY    OF    CHRIST    IN    GENERAL. 

Pag6 

5  1.  The  Indifference  of  Criticism  rejected 1 

§1  2.  The  Truth,  that  Christ  is  God-man,  presupposed  ....         2 

^  3.  This  Presupposition  and  the  historical  Accounts  mutually  confirm  and 

illustrate  each  other  .........? 

CHAPTER  n. 

SOURCES    OF    THE    HISTORY    OF    CHRIST. 

§  4.  Traditional  Orison  of  the  Synoptical  Gospels         ......        6 

§  5.  Genuineness  of  Joan's  Gospel        t         .         .         .         .         .         .         •         6 

§  6.  Results  of  Criticism       .         .........        7 


BOOK    I. 
BIRTH   AND   CHILDHOOD   OF    JESUS. 

CHAPTER  I. 

INTRODUCTION. 

5  7.  Scantiness  of  our  Information  in  regard  to  this  Period  of  Christ's  Life ; 

nothing  further  essential  to  the  Interests  of  Religion  .         .         .11 

§  8.  Fundamentally  opposite  Modes  of  apprehending  the  Accounts      .         .       11 

CHAPTER  II. 

THE    MIRACULOUS    CONCEPTION. 

^  9.  The  miraculous  Conception  demanded  a  priori,  and  confinned  a  pos- 
teHori        .......■•■•■ 

^  10.  No  trace  of  a  Mythus  in  the  NaiTative.     Such  a  Myth  could  not  have 

originated  among  the  Jewi.sh  People  ......       13 

§  11.  Objections  to  the  Credibility  of  the  Narrative  fi-om  the  subsequent  Dis- 
positions of  Christ's  Relations  answered,  (1)  from  the  Nature  of  the 
Case  ;  (2)  from  the  Name  .Jesus 1*5 

$  12.  Analogical  Ideas  among  the  Heathen I'' 

CHAPTER  III. 

THE    BIRTH    AND    CHILDHOOD    OF    CHRIST. 

§  13.  The  Birth  of  Christ  in  its  Relations  to  the  Jewish  Theocracy  .  .  18 
§  14.  The  mii'aculous  Events  that  accr)mpanied  it  .  .  .  .  .1!) 
$15.  The  Taxing;  Jesus  bom  at  Bethlehem 20 


13 


xxxvi  CONTENTS. 

Pags 

^  16.  The  Aiinoiuicement  of  the  Shepherds   .......  21 

$  17.  The  Sacrifice  of  "  rurification,"  and  the  "  Rausoin  of  the  Fh-st-burn." 

Then-  Weight  a.s  Proof  again.st  the  Mythical  Theory  .         .         .  23 

§  18.  Simeon's  prophetic  Discourse         ........  24 

$  19.  The  longing  of  the  Ileatiieu  for  a  Saviour.     The  Star  of  the  Wise  Men  2.'> 
$  20.  The  Massacre  of  the  Innocents,  and  the  Flight  into  Egypt    .         .         .27 

$  21.  The  Return  to  Nazareth 2S 

$  22.  Brothers  and  Sisters  of  Jesus;  the  mention  of  them  in  the  Gospel  Nar- 
rative a  Proof  of  Credibility 29 

§  23.  Consciousness  of  Messiahship  in  the  Mind  of  Jesus.     Christ  among  the 

Doctor.^ 30 


/ 


BOOK   II. 

THE  MENTAL  CULTURE  OF  JESUS:   HIS  LIFE  TO  THE 
TIME  OF  HIS  PUBLIC  MINISTRY. 

CHAPTER  I. 

JESUS    NOT    EDUCATED    I.V    THE    THEOLOGICAL    SCHOOLS    OF    THE    JEWS. 

§  24.  The  Pharisees .         .  .1.-> 

$  25.  The  Sadducees 35 

$  26.  The  Essenes 37 

$  27.  The  Alexandrian  Jews 3'J 

$  28.  Affinity  of  Christianity,  as  absolute  Tmth,  for  the  various  opposing 

Systems     ............  3!) 

$  29.  Christ's  Doctrine  revealed  from  Withui,  not  received  from  Without      .  3!) 

§  30.  The  popular  Sentiment  in  regard  to  his  Connexion  with  the  Schools     .  40 

CHAPTER  n. 

THE    LIFE    OF    JESUS    TO    THE    OPENING    OF    HIS    PUBLIC    MINISTRY. 

§31.  Consciousness  of  Messiahship  in  Christ 41 


BOOK   III. 
PREPARATIVES  TO  THE  PUBLIC  MINISTRY  OF  CHRIST. 

PART    L 

OBJECTIVE  PREPARATION:   MINISTRY  OF  JOHN  THE  BAPTIST. 
CHAPTER  I. 

UELATION    OF    THE    BAPTIST   TO    THE    JEWS. 

5  32.  How  far  the  Baptist  ret;it;e<i  the  Expectation  of  a  Messiah  .  .  .'  -4.') 
$  33.  Causes  of  Ob.scurity  in  the  Accounts  left  us  of  the  Baptist.     Sources, 

viz.,  tho  EvangdistK,  Joxcphus            .......  AG 

$  34.  The  Baptist's  mode  f)f  Life  and  Toacliing  in  the  Desert         .         .         .  -IS 

$  35.  John  as  Bajitist  and  Preacher  of  Repentance 4<) 

$  30.  Relations  of  tho  Plmrisees  and  Sadducees  to  tlie  Baptist  .  .  .  .''.() 
§  37.   Relations  of  the  Baptist  to  the  Peopl(>,  and  to  the  narrower  Circle  of 

his  own  Disciples r^^ 

5  38.  Joliii's  Demands  upon  the  People  compared  with  those  of  Christ.      His 

huiuMc  Opiuioa  of  his  own  Calling ,  .')2 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  II. 

THE    RELATION    OK    THE    BAPTIST    TO    THE    MESSIAH. 


§  39.  The  Baptist's  Explauatiou  of  liis  Relation  to  Messiah 

by  Water  and  by  Fire 

$  40.  The  Baptist's  Conception  of  Messiah's  Kingdom  . 
§41.  The  Baptist's  Recognition  of  Jesus  as  Messiah 

(1)  Import  of  his  Baptism  of  Jesus 

(2)  The  Continuance  of  his  Ministry     .         . 

(3)  Possible  Wavering  in  his  Cou\'ictions 

(4)  His  Message  from  Prison        .... 

(5)  Conduct  of  his  Disciples  towards  Jesus 
§  42.  The  Phenomena  at  the  Baptism,  and  their  Import 

(1)  No  ecstatic  Vision  ..... 

(2)  The  Ebionitish  View,  and  its  Opposite 

(3)  Developement  of  the  Notion  of  Baptism  in  New  T( 

(4)  The  Baptism  of  Christ  not  a  Rite  of  Purification 
(.5)  But  of  Consecration  to  his  Theocratic  Reign  . 

(6)  John's  previous  Acquaintance  with  Christ 

(7)  Explanation  of  John,  i.,  31     . 

(8)  The  Vision  and  the  Voice:  intended  exclusively  for  the  Baptist 


The  Baptism 


cstament 


54 
.'3.5 
57 
57 
58 
60 
60 
61 
61 
62 
63 
64 
65 
65 
66 
67 


PART    II. 

SUBJECTIVE  PREPARATION  :   THE  TEMPTATION  OF  CHRIST. 
CHAPTER  I. 

IMPORT   OF    THE    INDIVIDUAL    TEMPTATIONS. 

§  43.  The  Hunger 70 

§44.  The  Pinnacle  of  the  Temple 71 

5  45.  The  World-Dominion 72 

CHAPTER  II. 

IMPORT    OF    THE    TEMPTATION    AS    A    WHOLE. 

§  46.  Fundamental  Idea 73 

$  47.  The  Temptation  not  an  inward  one,  but  the  Work  of  Satan  .         .       73 


BOOK    IV. 

THE  PUBLIC  MINISTRY  OF  CHRIST  ACCORDING  TO  ITS 
REAL  CONNEXION. 


^ 


PART    L 

THE    PLAN    OP    CHRIST. 


CHAPTER   I. 

THE    PLAN    OF    CHRIST    l.\   GENERAL. 

§  48.   Had  Christ  a  conscious  Plan  ?......,.       79 

$  49.  Connexion  with  the  Old  Testament  Theocracy 81 

$50.  Christ's  steadfast  Consciousness  of  Messiahship 81 


coNTEr  rs. 

Page 


5  51.  His  Plan  underwent  no  Alterations 

§  52.  Two-fold  Bearing  of  the  Kingdom  of  God.     (1)  An  inward,  spiritual 
Power:  (2)  A  world-renewing  Power 

,  CHAPTER  II. 

'    THE    PLAN    OF    CHRIST    IN    ITS    RELATION    TO    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT   IDEA    OF    THE 
KINGDOM    OF    GOD. 

$  53.  Christ's  observance  of  the  Je-wish  Worship  and  Law    . 

§  54.  His  Manifestation  greater  than  the  Temple 

$  55.  The  Conversation  with  the  Samaritan  Woman  .... 
$  56.  The  "  Destroying"  and  "  FulfiUing"  of  the  Law  .... 
$  57.  The  Interpolation  in  Luke,  vi.,  4.     (Cod.  Cant.)  .... 


86 


89 
90 
91 
92 


CHAPTER  III. 

'      '         NEW    FOR.M    OF   THE    IDEA    OF    THE    PERSON    OF    THE    THEOCRATIC    KING. 

$  58.  The  Names  "  Son  of  God"  and  "  Son  of  Man" 94 

§  59.  Import  of  the  Title  "  Son  of  Man,"  as  used  by  Clirist  himself.     Rejec- 
tion of  Alexandrian  and  other  Analogies 95 

§  60.  Import  of  the  Title  "Son  of  God" 96 

(1)  John's  Sense  of  the  Title  accordant  with  that  of  the  other  Evan- 
gelists          96 

(2)  And  confirmed  by  Paul's 97 

PART   11. 

THE  MEANS  AND  INSTRUMENTS  OP  CHRIST. 
CHAPTER  I. 

THE    MEANS   OF    CHRIST    IN    GENERAL. 

$61.  Christ  a  Spiritual  Teacher 99 

$62.  Different  Theatres  of  liis  Work  as  Teacher 99 

$  63.  Choice  and  Training  of  the  Apostles  to  be  subordinate  Teachers  .     100 

CHAPTER  II. 
Christ's  mode  of  teaching  in  regard  to  its  method  and  form, 
a.  its  general  principles. 
§  64.  His  Mode  of  Teaching  adapted  to  the  Stand-point  of  his  Hearers  .         .     101 
§  65.  His  Truth  presented  in  Ger-tn  to  be  developed  :  Seeds  of  Thought        .     102 
$  66.  Its  Results  dependent  upon  the  Susceptibility  of  the  Hearers        .         .     103 
$  67.  This  con-esponds  to  the  general  Law  of  Developement  of  the  Kingdom 

ofGod 106 

B.    CHRIST'S   USE    OF    PARABLES. 

$  68.  Idea  of  the  Parable.  Distinction  between  Parable,  Fable,  and  Mythus  107 
$  69.  Order  in  wliich  the  Parables  were  delivered.    Their  Perfection.    Mode 

of  interpreting  them 108 

$  70.  Christ's  Teacliing  not  confined  to  Parables,  but  conveyed  also  in  longer 

Discourses         .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .109 

§  71.  John's  Gos[)el  contains  chiefly  connected  and  profound  Discourses,  and 

why? 110 

$  72.  The  Parable  of  the  Shepherd,  in  John,  compared  with  the  Parables  m 

the  other  Gospels HI 


CONTENTS.  xxxix 

C.   CHRIST'S   USE   OF    ACCOMMODATION. 

$73.  Necessity  of  AccommoLlatiou .         .  113 

$74.  Distinction  between  Material  and  Formal  Accommodation   .         .         .  114 

$  75.  Christ's  Application  of  Passages  from  Old  Testament     ....  115 

CHAPTER  III. 

CHOICE    AND    TRAINING   OF    THE    APOSTLES    AS    TEACSERS. 

§  76.  Christ's  Relation  to  the  Twelve.     Significance  of  the  Number.     The 

Name  Apostle  .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .  Ilti 

$77.  Choice  of  the  Apostles.     Of  Judas  Iscariot 117 

$78.  The  Apostles  uneducated  Men 119 

$  79.  Two  Stages  in  their  Dependence  upon  Christ 120 

$80.  Christ's  peculiar  Method  of  Training  the  Apostles         .         .         .         .121 

CHAPTER  IV. 

THE    CHURCH    AND    BAPTISM. 

$  81.  Foundmg  of  the  Church.     Its  Objects 122 

$  82.  Name  of  the  Church.     Its  Form  traced  back  to  Christ          .         .         .  123 

$83.  Later  Institution  of  Baptism  as  an  initiatoiy  Rite  .         ....  126 

CHAPTER  V. 

THE    MIRACLES    OF    CHRIST:     THEIR    CHARACTER    AND    OBJECTS. 
A.    THE   OBJECTIVE    CHARACTER  OF   MIRACLES. 

$  84.  Connexion  of  Christ's  Miracles  with  his  Mode  of  Teaching  .                  .  127 

$  85.  Negative  Element 127 

$  86.  Positive  Element.     Teleological  Object 129 

$  87.  Relation  of  Miracles  to  the  Course  of  Nature 130 

$  88.  Relation  of  the  individual  Miracles  to  the  highest  Miracle,  viz.,  the 

Manifestation  of  Christ      .........  131 

$  89.  Relation  of  Miracles  to  History 13ii 

B.   THE    MIRACLES   OF   CHRIST    AS  VIEWED    BY   HIS   CONTEMPORARIES. 

$  90.  Miracles  deemed  an  essential  Sign  of  Messiahship         ....  132 

C.    CHRIST'S   OWN   ESTIMATE   OF    HIS   MIRACLES. 

$91.  Apparent  Discrepancies :  Mode  of  removing  them         ....  134 

(1)  Two-fold  Object  of  the  Mu-acles      . 134 

(2)  A  Susceptibility  for  Impression  presupposed  .....  135 

$92.  His  Explanation  of  the  "  Sign  of  the  Prophet  Jonah"     ....  136 

$  93.  His  Declaration,  "  Destroy  this  Temple,"  &c.         .         .         .         .         .  137 

$  94.  His  Distinction  between  the  Material  and  Formal  in  the  Miracles         .  137 

$  95.  His  Appeals  to  Miracles  as  Testimony.     Three  different  Stages  of  Faith  138 
$  96.  The  Communication  of  the  Divine  Life  the  highest  Miracle  .         .         .140 

CHAPTER  VL 

THE    MIRACLES    OP    CHRIST    CONSIDERED    IN    REGARD  TO    SUPERNATURAL    AGENCY. 

$  97.  Transition  from  the  Natural  to  the  Supernatural  in  the  Miracles    .         .140 

A.   MIRACLES  WROUGHT    UPON   HUMAN    NATURE. 

I.    The  Healing  of  Diseases. 

$  98.  Use  of  Spiritual  Agencies.     Faith  demanded  for  the  Cure     .         .         .  141 

$99.  Use  of  Physical  Agencies 142 


xl  CONTENTS. 

$  100    Relation  between  Sin  and  Physical  Evil.     Jewish  Idea  of  Punitive 

Justice.     Christ's  Doctrine  on  the  Subject        .         .         .         .         .143 

II.  Demoniacal  Possession. 
$  101.  Two  e.xtreme  Theories.     Analogous  Phenomena  .         .         .         .145 

$  102.  Comiexion  of  the  Phenomena  with  the  State  of  the  Times   .         .         .     146 
$  103.  Accommodation  of  the  two  extreme  Theories      .....     147 
$  104.  Cluist's  Explanations   of  Demonism  pm'ely  Spu'itual.     His  Accom- 
modation to  the  Conceptions  of  the  Demoniacs         .         .         .         .149 
$  10-3.  DitTerences  between  Christ's  Cures  of  Demoniacs  and  the  Operations 

of  the  Jewish  Exorcists .         .150 

III.    The  Raising  of  the  Dead. 
$  106.  Different  Views  on  these  Miracles 151 

B.   MIRACLES   WROUGHT   UPO.N    MATERIAL   NATURE. 

$107.  Most  obvious  Manifestations  of  SujieruatTiral  Power     ....     152 


BOOK   V. 

THE  PUBLIC  MINISTRY  OF  CHRIST  ACCORDING  TO  ITS 
CHRONOLOGICAL  CONNEXION. 

INTRODUCTION. 

ON  THE  DIFFERENCES  BETWEEN  THE   SYNOPTICAL    GOSPELS  AND 

JOHN. 
$  108.  Differences  in  Chronology    .........      155 

$109.  Differences  as  to  the  Theatre  of  Christ's  Labours         .         .         .         .155 

$  110.   Proof  that  Christ  frequently  exercised  his  Ministiy  in  Judc;i    and 

Jerusalem         ...........     1j6 

PART   L 

FROM  THE  COMMENCEMENT  OF   CHRIST'S  PUBLIC  MINISTRY  TO  THE 
TRIUMPHAL  ENTRY. 

CHAPTER   I. 

JESUS    AND    JOH.S    THE    BAPTIST.       THE    FIRST    DISCI  Pl.r.S. 

$111.  Messjigc  of  the  Sanhedrim  to  John  at  Bothabara  .         .         .         .159 

$  112.  John  points  to  Jesus  as  the  Suffering  Mossiali,  and  teslilies  to  his  Iligln  r 

Dignity IGO 

$  113.  John  and  Andrew,  Disciples  of  the  Baptist,  attacli  thcm.selves  to  Jesus. 

Ciradual  Attraction  of  others      ........     162 

CHAPTER  II. 

FIRST    PUBLIC    TEACHING   OF    CHRIST.       CAPERNAUM. 

$  114.  Miraculous  Draught  of  Fishefl.     Effect  on  Peter,  Andrew,  James,  and 

John 162 

$115.  The  Calling  of  Nathanael 1G4 

CHAPTER  III. 

CHRIST    AT    C  A  N  A. 

J  116.  The  Water  changed  into  Wine.     Character  and  Import  of  the  Miracle     lofi 


CONTENTS.  xU 


CHAPTER  IV. 

FIRST    JOURNEY    TO    JERUSALEM    TO    ATTExVD    THE    FEAST    OF    PASSOVER. 


Page 
1(J8 
170 

17:5 
173 
174 
175 
177 


§117.  The  Cleansing  of  the  Temple        .... 
.  §  118.  The  Saying  of  Christ,  "  Destroy  this  Temple,"  &c. 
§  119.  Christ  and  Nicodemus  .         .         .         . 

(1)  Dispositions  of  the  Pharisees  and  People:  of  Nico 

(2)  The  New  Birth 

(3)  The  Bu-th  of  "  Water  and  tlie  Spirit"    . 
^,rf,  (4)  Christ  intimates  his  own  Sufferings 

CHAPTER  V. 

JESUS    AT    .ENON,   NEAR    SALIM. 

$  120.  Jealousy  of  John's  Disciples.     Final  Testimony  of  the  Baptist.     His 

Imprisonment  .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .178 

CHAPTER  VI. 

RETURN    THROUGH    SAMARIA    TO    GALILEE:    THE    SAMARITAN    WOMAN. 

§  121.  First  Impressions  of  the  Samaritan  Woman  .         .         .         .         .180 

$  122.  Christ's  Decision  between  the  Worship  of  the  Jews  and  that  of  the 

Samaritans 181 

§  123.  The  Worship  of  God  in  "Spirit  and  in  Truth" 182 

$  124.  Bearing  of  the  Spii'itual  Worship  upon  Practical  Life  .  .  .  .183 
§  125.  Christ  Glances  at  the  future  Progress  of  his  Kingdom,  and  at  his  own 

■*■  Death 184 

§  126.  Subsequent  State  of  the  Samaritans      .......      185 

CHAPTER  VII. 

Christ's  first  general  ministry  in  galilee. 
$  127.  Christ  heals  the  Nobleman's  Son.  Chooses  Capernaum  as  his  Abode  185 
§  128.  Christ  appears  in  the  Synagogue  at  Nazareth.  His  Life  is  Endangei-ed  186 
$  129.  Parable  of  the  Sower.  Christ's  Explanation  of  it  ....  188 
§  130.  Parable  of  the  Draw-net:  of  the  Wheat  and  Tares  .  .  .  .190 
§  131.  Christ  subdues   tlie   Storm.     Character   of  the    Miracle.     Its    moral 

Import 191 

§  132.  The  Gadarene  Demoniac     .........     192 

$  133.  Return  to  the  west  Side  of  the  Sea.  Healing  of  the  Issue  of  Blood  .  195 
§  134.  Raising  of  Jairas's  Daughter,  and  of  the  Widow's  Son  at  Nain  .  .196 
$  135.  Doubts  of  John  Baptist  in  Prison.     His  Message.     Christ's  Testimony 

concerning  Him.     Relation  of  Old  and  New  Dispensations       .         .      198 
§  136.  Relation  of  the  People  to  the  Baptist  and  to  Christ.     The  Easy  Yoke 

and  the  Light  Burden.     Jewish  Legalism  contrasted  witli  Christian 

Liberty .         .     201 

$  137.  Christ's  Conversation  with  tlie  Pharisees  in  regard  to  his  Disciples' 

Mode  of  Life.     The  Morals  of  Fasting 203 

$  138.  Pai'able  of  the  New  Patch  on  the  Old  Garment :  of  the  New  Wine  in 

Old  Bottles 205 

§  139.  Forms  of  Prayer.     The  Lord's  Prayer 208 

§  140.  Christ  and  the  Magdalen  at  Simon's  House.     Reciprocal  Action  of 

Love  and  Faith  in  the  Forgiveness  of  Sins        .         .         .         .         .211 
^  141.  Call  of  Matthew  the  Publican.     The  Feast 213 


xlii  CONTENTS. 

Page 

$  142.  Christ's  different  Modes  of  Reply  to  those  who  questioned  his  Con- 
duct in  consorting  with  Sinners.  Parable  of  the  Prodigal  Son :  of 
the  Pharisee  and  Publican 214 

CHAPTER  VIII. 
Christ's  second  journey  to  Jerusalem. 
V^  143.  The  Miracle  of  the  Pool  of  Bethesda.     The  Words  of  Christ  in  the 

Temi)le  to  the  Man  healed 217 

§  144.  Christ  accused  of  Sabbath-breakmg  and  Blasphemy.     His  Discourse 

in  Vindication 218 

§  145.  The  Discourse  continued:  Christ  intimates  his  greater  Works.     His 

Judgment,  and  the  Resurrection 211) 

§  14G.  The  Discourse  continued:   Christ  Appeals  to  the  Testimony  of  his 

Works 220 

^  $  147.  The  Discourse  continued :  Incapacity  of  the  Jews  to  Understand  the 

Testimony  of  God  in  the  Scriptures 221 

CHAPTER  IX. 

Christ's  second  course  of  extended  labour  in  galilee. 
The   Sermon  on   the   Mount. 
Introduction. 
$  148.  (1)  Place  and  Circumstances 223 

(2)  Subject-matter  of  the  Sermon;  viz.,  the  Kingdom  of  God  as  the 

Aim  of  the  Old  Dispensation 223 

(3)  Two  Editions  of  the  Sermon:  Matthew's  and  Luke's   .         .         .     224 
^^^  (4)  Its  Pervadmg  Rebuke  of  Carnal  Conceptions  of  the  Messiahship  .     224 

-'''  I.    The  Beafitndes. 

$  149.  Moral  Requisites  for  Entering  the  Kingdom  of  God       ....     224 

(1)  Poverty  of  Spirit 224 

(2)  Meekness .     225 

(3)  Hungering  and  Thirsting  after  Righteousness  ....  22« 
^  150.  Moral  Result  of  Entering  the  Kingdom.  "  The  Pure  in  Heart  see  God"  22fi 
$  151.  Moral  Relations  of  the  Members  of  the  Kingdom  to  their  Fellow-men; 

viz.,  they  are  "  Peace-makers,"  and  "  Persecuted"  ....     227 
II.  Inflztence  of  the  Members  of  the  Kingdom  of  God  in  Renewing  the  World. 
§  152.  The  Disciples  of  Christ  the  "  Light"  and  "Salt"  of  the  Earth       .         .     228 
III.    The  Laic  of  Christian  Life  the  Fulfilment  of  the  Old  Late. 

5  153.  FnlHlling  the  Law  and  the  Proi^hets 22r> 

$  154.  Fulfilling  the  Law  in  the  Higher  Sense.     General  Contrast  between 

the  Juridical  and  Moral  Stand-points 23] 

$  155.  Fulfilling  the  Law  in  the  Higher  Sense.     Special  Examples,  viz.,  (1.) 
Murder;  (2.)  Adultery;  (3.)  Divorce;  (4.)  Peijury;  (5.)  Revenge; 

(0.)  National  Exclusiveness 232 

IV.    True  Religion  contrasted  with  the  Mock  Piety  of  the  Pharisees. 
$  156.  (1.)  Alms,  Prayer,  and  Fasting;   (2.)    Rigid  Judgment  of  Self,  Mild 

Judgment  of  others;  (3.)  Test  of  Sincerity 235 

V.    Warning  to  the  Childrcti  of  the  Kingdom. 
$157.  E.xhortation  to  Self-denial.     Warning  against  Seducers        .         .         .     23S 

VI.    True  and  False  Disciples  Contrasted. 
§  158.  Test  of  Disciplcship 237 


CONTENTS.  xliii 

Page 

$  159.  Healing  of  the  Leper  on  the  Way  to  Capernaum          ....  237 

$160.  Healhig  uf  the  Centui-jon's  Slave  at  Capernaum 238 

$  161.  Healing  of  the  Deaf  and  Dumb  Demoniac.     Charge  of  a  League  with 

Beelzebub  reflited 23D 

$  162.  Conjurations  of  the  Jewish  Exorcists 241 

§  163.  Blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  against  the  Son  of  Man          .  243 
$104.  Puqiose  of  Christ's  Relatives  to  confine  him  as  a  Limatic     .         .         .  244 
_^$  165.  Demand  for  a  Sign  answered  by  "  the  Sign  of  the  Prophet  Jonah"      .  245 
.-^  %  166.  Discourse  at  a  Feast  against  the  Pharisees  and  Lawyers      .         .         .  246 
$  167.  The  Disciples  Warned  against  the  Pharisees.     Power  of  Trath  .         .  248 
$  168.  Christ  Heals  a  Paralytic  at  Capernaum.     Charge  of  Blasphemy  Re- 
pelled         250 

5  169.  Withered  Hand  healed  on  the  Sabbath.     Objections  anticipated          .  252 

%  170.  Infirm  Woman  healed  on  the  Sabbath.     Pharisees  disconcerted  .         .  253 

$171.  Precedence  at  Feasts.  Parable  of  the  Great  Supper  ....  254 
$  172.  The  Pharisees  attack  the  Disciples  for  plucking  Corn  on  the  Sabbath. 

Christ  defends  them 255 

$  173.  Discourse  against  the  merely  outward  Cleanliness  of  the  Pharisees      .  256 

$174.  Ti-ial  Mission  of  the  Apostles  in  Galilee 257 

(1)  Objects  of  the  Mission.     Powers  of  the  Missionaries     .         .         .  257 

(2)  Instnictions  to  the  Missionaries.     Reasons  for  the  Exclusion  of 

Samaritans  and  Heathen 258 

(3)  Instnictions  continued :  the  Apostles  to  rely  on  Providence  .         .  260 
$  175.  Various  Opinions  entertained  of  Jesus 260 

'^$  176.  Return  of  the  Apostles.     Feeding  of  the  Five  Thousand       .         .         .  261 

$  177.  Christ  Walks  upon  the  Waters 264 

$  178.  Christ  in  the  Synagogue  at  Capernaum 255 

(1)  Carnal  Mind  of  the  Multitude  rebuked 265 

^_^  (2)  Christ  the  "Bread  of  Life" 266 

,>-''"^  ^(3)  Eating  Christ's  Flesh  and  Drinking  liis  Blood        .         .         .         .267 

'"^       (4)  Sifting  of  the  Apostles.     Confession  of  Peter         ....  269 

CHAPTER  X. 

JESUS    IN    NORTH    GALILEE,  AND    ON    THE    WAY  TO    CESAREA    PHILIPPI. 

$  179.  Reasons  of  the  Journey 270 

$  180.  Blind  Man  cured  at  Bethsaida.     Peter's  Second  Confession.     Power 

of  the  Keys 270 

,.-$  181.  The  Disciples  forbidden  to  reveal  Christ's  Messianic  Dignity.     Peter's 

y                      Weakness  rebuked 272 

$  182.  Monitions  to  the  Apostles 273 

(1)  Wisdom  of  Serpents  and  Harmlessness  of  Doves  .         .         .         .  .273 

(2)  Parable  of  the  Unjust  Steward 274 

(3)  "  Friends  of  the  Mammon  of  Unrighteousness"     ....  275 

$  183.  Caution  against  impradent  Zeal 277 

$  184.  The  Syro-PhcEuician  Woman.     (1.)  Her  Prayer;  (2.)  Her  Repulse; 

(3.)  Her  persevering  Faith;  (4.)  The  Result 279 

$  185.  The  Transfigiu-atiou 281 

$  186.  Elias  a  Foremimer  of  Messiah     .         .         .         .         .          .         .         .  283 

$187.  Cure  of  a  Demoniac,  after  vain  Attempts  of  the  Disciples  .  .  .  283 
$  188.  The  Disciples'  Failure  explained.     The  Power  of  Faith.     Prayer  and 

Fasting 285 

$  189.  Return  to  Capernaum.    Dispute  for  Precedence.    The  Child  a  Pattern. 

Acting  ui  the  Name  of  Christ 286 


xliv  CONTENTS. 

rage 

$  190.  Chi-ist's  two  Sayings,  "He  that  is  not  against  you  is  for  you;"  and, 

"  He  tliat  is  not /or  me  is  against  me" ■  ~88 

§  191.  The  Stater  in  the  Fish 290 

CIIArXER  XI. 

Christ's  journey  to  Jerusalem  to  attend  the  feast  of  tabernacles. 

$192.  His  Precautions  against  the  Sanhedrim -91 

$  193.  Christ  E.vi)lains  the  Nature  of  his  Teaching  as  Divine  Revelation          .  292 

$  194.  The  Pharisees  attem^Jt  to  arrest  Him 293 

$  195.  Christ  a  "Spring  of  Living  Water,"  and  the  "Light  of  the  World." 

Validity  of  his  Testimony  of  Himself 294 

$  196.  Connexion  between  Steadfastness,  Tmth,  and  Freedom       .         .         .  296 

$  197.  Vain  Attempts  of  the  Sanhedrim.  Finst  Decision  against  Christ  .  297 
$  198.  Man  born  Blind  healed  on  the  Sabbath.     Individual  Sufferings  not  to 

be  judged  a  Punishment  for  Siu 298 

6  199.  Attempts  of  the  Sanhedrim  to  cornipt  the  restored  Man.     "  The  Sight 

of  the  Blind,  and  the  Bluidness  of  the  Seeing"          ....  300 

§  200.  Parable  of  the  Good  Shepherd.     The  Parable  extended      .         .         .  301 

§201.   Divisions  among  the  People.     Christ  returns  to  Galilee        .         .         .  302 

CHAPTER  XII. 

RETURN    FROM    CAPERNAUM    TO    JERUSALEM    THROUGH    SAMARIA. 

$  202.  Reasons  for  the  Journey  through  Samaria 303 

§  203.  Mission  of  the  Seventy.     Significance  of  the  Number  ....  304 
§  204.  Insti-uctions  to  the  Seventy.     The  Wo  to  the  Unbeheving  Cities          .  30.'> 
$  20.>.  Exultation  of  the  Disciples.     Christ  warns  them  against  Vanity   .         .  30G 
§  20G.  The  Kingdom  revealed  to  Babes.     Blessedness  of  the  Disciples  in  be- 
holding it 307 

^  §  207.   Requisites  of  Discipleship.     Self-Denial,  Submission,   taking  up  the 

^                        Cross 309 

§  208.  Self-Denial  further  illustrated:  Pai-ables  of  the  building  of  the  Towei-. 
of  the  Warring  King,  of  the  Sacrificial  Salt,  of  the  Treasure  hid  in  a 

Field,  of  the  Pearl  of  Great  Price 311 

§  209.  Cla-ist  refu.ses  to  interfere  in  Civil  Disputes.     His  Decision  in  the  Case 

of  the  Adulteress       .         .         . .312 

$210.  Christ  Intimates  the  Future  .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .314 

5  211.  Parables  of  the  Mustard  Seed  and  the  Leaven 314 

^^§212.  The  Fire  to  be  Kindled.    The  Baptism  of  Sufterings.    Christianity  not 

-^                     Peace,  but  a  Sword 315 

$213.  Tiie  Kingdom  of  God  Cometh  not  with  Observation      ....  317 

$214.  Christ's  personal  Return  and  the  Day  of  Judgment       ....  317 

$  215.  Exhortation  to  Watch  for  Christ's  Coming.     The  importunate  Widow  318 

$216.  Call  to  entire  Devotion.     The  Straight  Gate 319 

$  217.  The  Signs  of  the  Times 320 

$  218.  Tlie  contracted  Jewish  Theocracy  Rejected  ....  321 
$219.  Parable  of  Dives  and  Lazanis       .         .         .                  .                            .321 

$  220.  Persecutions  of  Ilerod  Autipas .  323 

>'$221.  Christ  Speaks  of  Ills  Death 323 

$  222.   Healing  of  tlie  Ten  Lepers.     Ingratitude  of  the  Nine.     Gratitude  of 

the  one  Samaritan 324 


CONTENTS. 


xlv 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

Christ's  stay  at  Jerusalem  during  the  feast  of  dedication. 

Pas? 

9  223.  His  Statemeiit  of  the  Proofs  of  bis  Messiahsliij).     His  Oueuess  with 

the  Father.     He  defends  his  Words  from  the  Old  Testament  .         .     32fj 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

CHRIST    IN    PERjEA    (bETHABARa). 

§  224.  His  Decision  on  the  Question  of  Divorce.     Celibacy 
I  225.  The  Blessing  of  Little  Children  .... 
§  226.  Convei'sation  with  the  rich  Ruler  of  the  Synagogue 

§  227.  The  Dangers  of  Wealth 

^  223.  The  Reign  of  Believers  with  Christ      . 


32,S 
331 
332 
334 
335 


^ 


CHAPTER  XV. 

CHRIST    IN    BETHANY. 

§  229.  Family  of  Lazarus.     Martha  and  Maiy.     Their  different  Tendencies  33'i 

9  230.  Sickness  of  Lazarus.     Christ's  Reply  to  the  Messengers       .         .         .  337 
$231.  Death  of  Lazanis.     Christ's  Conversation  with  the  Disciples  in  regard 

to  it 338 

§  232.  Death  of  Lazarus.     Christ's  Conversation  with  Martha ;  whh  Mary     .  340 

§  233.  Resurrection  of  Lazarus.     Christ's  Prayer 342 

§  234.  IMeasures  of  the  Sanhedrim 343 

CHAPTER  XVL 

CHRIST    IN    EPHRAIJI. 

$  235.  The  Necessity  for  his  Death 344 

CHAPTER  XVIL 

CHRIST'S    LAST    PASSOVER    JOURNEY    TO    JERUSALEM. 

§  236.  .Tourney  to  Jericho.     Blind  Bartimeus 345 

§  237.  Christ  Lodges  with  Zaccheus 346 

ij  238.  The  Request  of  Salome.     Ambition  of  the  Disciples  rebuked      .         .  347 

§  239.  Parable  of  the  Pounds 348 

6  240.  Parable  of  the  Laboin-ers  in  the  Vineyard   ......  349 

§  241.  Passion  for  Rewards  rebuked       ........  350 

$  242.  Christ  Anointed  by  Mary  iu  Bethany 351 


PART    II. 

FROM  THE  TRIUMPHAL  ENTRY  TO  THE  ASCEN.'^IOK. 
CHAPTER  L 

FROM  THE  TRIUMPHAL  ENTRY  TO  THE  LAST  SUPPER 

§  243.  The  Entiy  into  .Jerusalem    ...... 

§  244.  Sadness  of  Christ  at  Sight  of  the  City  . 

§1  245.  The  Fig-tree  Cursed.     Parable  of  the  Fig-tree     . 

§  246.  Machinations  of  the  Pharisees      ..... 

§  247.  Union  of  the  Pharisees  and  Herodians.     Tribute  to  Caesar 
§  248.  Christ's  Reply  to  the  Pharisees  about  the  Resurrection 
§  249.  His  Exposition  of  the  First  and  Great  Commandment 
§  250.  Parable  of  the  Good  Samaritan 


354 
3.56 
357 
359 
•360 
361 
3C2 
363 


xlvi  CONTENTS. 

Page 

§251.  Christ's  Interpretation  of  Psalm  ex.,  1                  364 

$  2.52.  The  Widow's  Mite 366 

§  253.  Christ  predicts  the  Divine  Judgments  upon  Jerusalem         .         .         .  366 

§  254.  He  predicts  the  Coming  of  the  Kingdom,  and  the  Second  Advent       .  367 

§  255.  Tai-able  of  the  Maniage  Feast  of  the  King's  Son          ....  369 

$256.  Tarable  of  the  wicked  Vine-dressers 371 

$  257.  Parable  of  the  Talents  compared  with  that  of  the  Pounds    .         .         .  372 

§  258.  Parable  of  the  Wise  and  Foolish  Virgins 373 

$  259.  Christ  teaches  that  Faith  must  prove  itself  by  Works  .         .         .         .  373 

$  260.  The  Heathens  with  Christ 375 

$  261.  Christ's  Straggles  of  Soul.     The  Voice  from  Heaven  .  .         .376 

$  262.  Chri.st  closes  his  Public  Ministry 373 

§263.  Machinations  of  his  Enemies 378 

§264.  Motives  of  Judas  in  Betraying  Clirist 379 

.     (1)  Avarice? 380 

(2)  False  Views  of  Christ's  Messiahship  ? 381 

(3)  Gradually  developed  Hostility? 383 

CHAPTER  II. 

THE    LAST    SUPPER. 

§  265.  Object  of  Christ  in  the  Last  Supper 384 

§266.  Christ's  washing  of  the  Disciples' Feet 386 

§  267.  His  Words  with,  and  concerning,  his  Betrayer 387 

§  268.  Institution  of  the  Eucharist 383 

CHAPTER  III. 
Christ's  last  discourses  at  table  with  the  disciples. 

§  269.  The  New  Commandment 391 

§270.  The  Request  of  Peter :  Christ  predicts  his  Denial       ....  392 

§271.  He  predicts  Danger  to  his  Disciples    .         .         .         .         .         .         .  392 

§  272.  He  consoles  the  Disciples .  394 

§  273.  Conversation  with  Philip  and  Thomas 395 

§274.  Of  Prayer  in  the  Name  of  Christ.     He  promises  the  Comforter  .         .  3IJ7 

§  275.  Christ's  Salutation  of"  Peace."     Its  Import 398 

CHAPTER   IV. 

DISCOURSES    OF    CHRIST    AFTER    RISING    FROM    TABLE. 

§276.  Similitude  of  the  Vine  and  Branches.     The  Law  of  Love  .         .         .  399 

§  277.  Final  Promise  of  the  Holy  Ghost 400 

§  278.  Christ's  Prayer  as  High-priest 402 

CHAPTER  V. 

G  E  T  H  S  E  M  A  N  E. 

§  279,  Comparison  of  John's  Gospel  with  tlie  Synoptical  Gospels  .         .         •  404 

§  280.  The  Agony  in  the  Garden 407 

§281.  The  Arrest.     Peter's  Haste  rebuked 403 

CHAPTER  VL 

THE    TRIAL    AND    CO.VDEMNATION. 

§282.  Night.     Examination  before  Annas .410 

^  283.  Morning.     Examination  before  Caiaphaa 41] 


CONTENTS.  xlvii 

§284.  Dotible-dealing  of  the  Sanhedrim 412 

$285.  Christ  before  Pilate.     His  Kmgdom  not  of  this  VVorid          .         .         .  413 

§286.  Christ  sent  to  Herod .415 

§287.  Pilate's  Fruitless  Efforts  to  save  Christ.     Dream  of  Pilate's  Wife          .  415 

§  288.  Last  Conversation  with  Pilate.     The  Sentence 416 

§  289.  Christ  led  to  Calvaiy.     Simon  of  Cyrene 417 

CHAPTER  Vn. 

THE    CRUCIFIXION. 

§  290.  Details  of  the  Crucifixion 418 

§  291.  Christ  prays  for  his  Enemies.     The  two  Thieves          ....  419 

§  292.  Christ's  Exclamation,  Psalm  xxii.     His  last  Words      ....  420 

§293.  Phenomena  accompanying  the  Death  of  Christ 121 

CHAPTER  Vm. 

THE    RESURRECTION. 

§294.  Did  Clnist  predict  his  Resun-eclion  ? 422 

§  295.  Sudden  Transition  of  the  Apostles  from  Dejection  to  Joy.     Argument 

from  this 423 

§  29G.  Was  the  Reappearance  of  Clu-ist  a  Vision  ? 424 

§  297.  Was  Christ's  a  real  Death? 425 

§  298.  The  Resurrection  intended  only  for  Believers 428 

§  299.  The  Women,  Peter,  and  John  at  the  Grave 428 

§  300.  Christ  appears  to  the  Women ;  to  Mary ;  to  the  two  Disciples  on  the 

Way  to  Emmaus 429 

§301.  Christ  appears  to  Peter ;  to  all  the  Apostles  except  Thomas  .  .  431 
§302.  Christ   appears  to  five   hundred   Believers;    to  James;    to  all   the 

Apostles.     Conversation  with  Thomas    *. 432 

§  303.  Christ  appears  in  Galilee  to  the  Seven  on  Genesareth         .         .         .  434 

§  304.  Christ  appears  in  Galilee  for  the  last  Time 435 

§  305.  Christ  appears  for  the  last  Time  near  Jerasalem          ....  435 

CHAPTER  IX. 

THE    ASCENSION. 

§306.  Connexion  of  the  Ascension  vdth  the  Resurrection       ....  436 

§  307.  The  Ascension  necessary  for  the  Conviction  of  the  Apostles         .         .  437 

§  308.  Connexion  of  all  the  supernatural  Facts  in  Christ's  Manifestation        .  438 


INTRODUCTION. 

CHAPTER  I. 

THE  IDEA  OF  THE  HISTORY  OF  CHRIST  IN  GENERAL. 

§  1.    The  Indifference  of  Criticism  rejected. 

IT  has  been  often  said  that,  in  order  to  true  inquiry,  we  must  take  noth- 
ing for  granted*  (Of  late  this  statement  has  been  reiterated  anew, 
with  special  reference  to  the  exposition  of  the  I-tife  of  Christ.  At  the 
outset  of  our  work  we  refuse  to  meet  such  a  demand.  To  comply  with 
it  is  impracticable  ;'•  the  very  attempt  contradicts  the  sacred  laws  of  our 
being.  We  cannot  entirely  free  ourselves  from  presuppositions,  which 
are  born  with  our  nature,  and  which  attach  to  the  fixed  course  of  prog- 
ress in  which  we  ourselves  are  involved.  They  control  our  conscious- 
ness, whether  we  will  or  no ;  and  the  supposed  freedom  from  them  is, 
in  fact,  nothing  else  but  the  exchange  of  one  set  for  another.  \  Some  of 
these  prepossessions,  springing  from  a  higher  necessity,  founded  in  the 
moral  order  of  the  universe,  and  derived  from  the  eternal  lawst  of  the 
Creator,  constitute  the  very  ground  and  support  of  our  nature.  From 
such  we  must  not  free  ourselves. 

But  we  are  ever  in  peril  of  exchanging  these  legitimate  sovereigns 
of  our  spiritual  being,  against  which  nothing  but  arbitrary  will  can  re- 
bel, for  the  prepossessions  of  a  self-created  or  traditional  prejudice, 
which  have  no  other  than  an  arbitrary  origin,  and  which  rule  by  no 
better  title  than  usurpation.  But  for  this  peril,  the  way  of  the  science 
of  life  would  be  as  safe  as  the  way  of  life  itself.  Life  moves  on  in  the 
midst  of  such  diversified  and  ever-commingling  prepossessions,  espe- 
cially in  our  own  time,  which,  torn  by  contrarieties  (contrarieties,  how- 
ever, which  subserve  a  higher  wisdom  by  balancing  each  other),  forms 
the  period  of  transition  to  a  new  and  better  creation.  On  the  one  hand 
we  behold  efforts  to  bring  the  human  mind  again  into  bondage  to  the 
host  of  arbitrary  prejudices  which  had  long  enough  enslaved  it ;  and, 

*  [Vora7isselzunc!'sIosigkeU  :  "freedom  from  presuppositions."] 
t  Of  which,  saj-s  Sophocles,  beautifully, 

naTYip  iibvns,  oiiSi  viv  ^vara 
<f>vaii  avipoiv  ctiktcv,  6vic 
ydv  iroTtXdda  KaTaKoindau 

Itiyai  fV  TOVTOli  5soj 

ovie  ytipduKu. 

1 


2  INTRODUCTION. 

on  the  other,  we  see  a  justifiable  protest  against  these  prejudices  run- 
ning into  the  extreme  of  rejecting  even  those  holy  prepossessions  which 
ought  to  rule  our  spiritual  being,  and  which  alone  can  offer  it  true 
freedom. 

What,  then,  is  the  duty  of  Science  ?  Must  she  dismiss  all  prepos- 
sessions, and  work  out  her  task  by  unassisted  thought  %  Far  from  it. 
From  nothing  nothing  comes;  the  Father  of  spirits  alone  is  a  Creator. 
Empty  indeed  is  that  enthusiasm  which  seeks  only  the  mere  sound  of 
truth — abstract,  formal  truth.*  This  absolute  abnegation  of  all  pre- 
possessions would  free  the  soul  from  those  holy  ties  by  which  alone  it 
can  connect  itself  with  its  source — the  source  of  all  truth — and  com- 
prehend it  by  means  of  its  revelations  in  humanity.  The  created  spirit 
cannot  deny  its  dependence  upon  God,  the  only  creative  Spirit ;  and 
it  is  its  obvious  destination  to  apprehend  the  revelation  of  God  in  crea- 
tion, in  nature,  and  in  history.  So,  the  work  of  science  can  only  be  to 
distinguish  the  prepossessions  which  an  inward  necessity  constrains  us 
to  recognize,  from  such  as  are  purely  voluntary.  Indeed,  the  healthful- 
ness  of  our  spiritual  life  depends  upon  our  ridding  ourselves  of  the  latter, 
and,  at  the  same  time,  yielding  in  lowliness  and  singleness  of  heart  to 
the  former,  as  the  law  of  the  Creator,  as  the  means  by  which  light  from 
heaven  may  be  conveyed  to  our  minds.  All  that  the  intellect  ha?,  to  do 
in  regard  to  these  last  is  to  demonstrate  their  necessity,  and  to  show 
that  our  being  contradicts  itself  in  rebelling  against  them. 

§  2.   The  Truth,  that  Christ  is  God-Man,  presitpjwscd. 
What,  then,  is  the  special  presupposition  with  which  we  must  ap- 
proach the  contemplation  of  the  Life  of  Christ  1     It  is  one  on  which 
hangs  the  very  being  of  the  Christian  as  such ;  the  existence  of  the 
Christian  Church,  and  the  nature  of  Christian  consciousness.f     It  is 

*  It  is  one  of  Pascal's  best  thouglits,  that  "  On  se  fait  niie  idole  de  la  verity  mCnue  :  car 
la  veritc  hors  de  la  cliarite  n'est  pas  Dieu  ;  c'est  son  image,  et  une  idole,  qu'il  no  faat  point 
aimer,  ni  adorer,  et  encore  moius  faut-il  aimer  ou  adorer  son  contraLre,  qui  est  le  men- 
songe." 

t  It  was  one  of  the  epoch-making  iadica-tiotis  of  Schleiermacher's  inflaence  upon  theol- 
ogy that  he  succeeded  in  stamping  this  phrase  (Christian  consciousness)  as  current,  with 
the  meaning  that  he  assigned  to  it,  in  an  age  which  (although  some  men,  blind  to  the  les- 
sons of  history,  look  back  upon  it  longingly  as  the  golden  age  of  our  nation)  was  guiilod 
only  by  the  naked  understanding,  and  destitute  at  once  of  faith  and  of  true  historical  insiLrht. 
He  used  it  to  denote  Christianity  as  an  undeniable,  self-rcvoaling  power,  entering  into  the 
life  of  humanity ;  an  immediate,  internal  power  in  the  spiritual  world,  from  which  wc-nt 
forth,  and  is  ever  going  forth,  the  regeneration  of  the  life  of  man,  and  which  produces  phe- 
nomena which  can  be  explained  in  no  other  way.  This  phrase,  and  tlie  thought  whidi  it 
expresses,  arc  able  to  maintain  their  ground  against  that  formalism  of  thought  which  is  so 
hostile  to  every  thing  immediate,  and  wishes  to  substitute  empty  abstractions  for  the  living 
powers  that  move  the  human  race,  as  well  as  against  that  low  and  mean  view  of  the  world 
(impertinently  obtrusive  as  it  has  been  of  late)  which  owns  no  jjower  above  those  which 
build  railways  and  set  steam-engines  agoing.  As  the  intuitive  consciousness  of  God  in- 
dicates to  the  human  niiud  the  existence,  the  omnipresent  power,  and  the  self-revelation  of 


INTRODUCTION.  3 

one  at  whose  touch  of  power  the  dry  bones  of  the  old  world  sprung  up 
in  all  the  vigour  of  a  new  creation.  It  gave  birth  to  all  that  culture  (the 
modei-n  as  distinguished  from  the  ancient)  from  which  the  Germanic 
nations  received  their  peculiar  intellectual  life,  and  from  which  the 
emancipation  of  the  mind,  grown  too  strong  for  it*  bonds,  was  devel- 
oped in  the  Reformation.  It  is  the  very  root  and  ground  of  our  mod- 
ern civilization ;  and  the  latter,  even  in  its  attempts  to  separate  from 
this  root,  must  rest  upon  it :  indeed,  should  such  attempts  succeed,  it 
must  dissolve  into  its  original  elements,  and  assume  an  entirely  new 
form.  It  is,  in  a  word,  the  belief  that  Jesus  Christ  is  the  Son  of  God  in 
a  sense  lohich  cannot  be  j^'t'cdicated  of  any  human  hcing, — the  perfect 
image  of  the  personal  God  in  the  form  of  that  humanity  that  was  es- 
tranged from  him ;  that  in  him  the  source  of  the  Divine  life  itself  in 
humanity  appeared  ;  that  by  him  the  idea  of  humanity  was  realized. 

§  3.  This  presupposed  Truth  and  the  Historical  Accounts  mutually  con- 
firm and  illustrate  each  other. 
But  as  man's  higher  nature  can  only  reach  its  true  destiny  in  Chris- 
tian consciousness,  from  which  the  great  First  Truth  just  mentioned  is 
inseparable,  it  is  necessary  that  this  first  truth  should  be  shown  to  be 
essential  also  to  the  general  consciousness  of  man.  That  it  is  so  can 
be  proved  from  its  harmony  with  the  universal  and  essential  prepos- 
sessions of  human  nature  ;  but  the  exhibition  of  this  proof  belongs  more 
properly  to  the  department  of  Apologetics.  It  is  shown  to  be  a  neces- 
sary and  not  a  voluntary  prepossession ;  first,  because  it  satisfies  a  fun- 
damental want  of  human  nature,  a  want  created  by  history,  and  fore- 
shadowing its  own  fulfilment ;  and,  secondly,  because  this  view  ot 
Christ's  person  arose  from  the  direct  impression  which  his  appearance 
among  men  made  upon  the  eye-witnesses,  and,  through  them,  upon  the 
whole  human  race.  This  image  of  Christ,  which  has  always  propa- 
gated itself  in  the  consciousness  of  the  Christian  Church,  originated  in, 
and  ever  points  back  to,  the  revelation  of  Christ  himself,  without  which, 
indeed,  it  could  never  have  arisen.  As  man's  limited  intellect  could 
never,  without  the  aid  of  revelation,  have  originated  the  idea  of  God, 
so  the  image  of  Christ,  of  which  we  have  spoken,  could  never  have 
sorung  from  the  consciousness  of  sinful  humanity,  but  must  be  regai'd- 
ed  as  the  reflection  of  the  actual  life  of  such  a  Christ.  It  is  Christ's 
self-revelation,  made,  through  all  generations,  in  the  fragments  of  his 
history  that  remain,  and  in  the  workings  of  his  Spirit  which  inspires 

a  personal  Deity,  so  does  this  "  Christian  consciousness"  testify  tliat  Christ  lived,  and  that 
he  continues,  by  his  Spirit,  to  operate  upon  mankind.  The  works  of  creation  only  reveal 
God  to  him  who  already  has  a  consciousness  of  the  Divine  existence  ;  for  he  who  has  not 
God  within  can  find  him  nowhere.  So  it  is  only  he  who  has  a  "  Christian  consciousness" 
that  can  recognize  Christ  in  the  fragments  of  tradition  and  the.  manifestations  of  history, 
or  that  can  comprehend  the  history  of  Christ  and  his  Church. 


4  INTRODUCTION. 

these  fragments,  and  enables  us  to  recognize  in  them  one  complete 
whole.*  It  is  a  stream  of  the  Divine  Life  which  has  spread  abroad 
through  all  ages  since  the  establishment  of  the  Christian  Church.  And 
the  peculiar  mark  of  this  Divine  Life  is  precisely  this,  that  it  is  ground- 
ed in  a  consciousness  of  absolute  dependence  upon  Christy  that  it  is 
nothing  else  but  a  constant  renewing  after  the  image  of  Christ.  But 
as  we  often  find  this  stream  darkened  and  troubled,  wo  are  necessarily 
led  back  to  Him,  the  well-spring  from  whom  the  full-flowing  fountain 
of  Divine  Life  gushes  forth  in  all  its  purity;  the  Son  of  God,  and  the 
Redeemer  of  men.  He  who  could  with  Divine  confidence  present 
himself  as  such  to  mankind,  and  call  all  men  to  come  unto  him  to  satis- 
fy the  cravings  of  their  higher  nature,  must  have  had  within  himself 
the  authority  of  an  infallible  consciousness. 

Now  if  we  can  show  that  the  Life  of  Christ,  without  the  aid  of  the 
First  Truth  which  forms  the  gi'ound  of  our  conception  of  it,  must  be 
unintelligible,  while,  on  the  contrary,  with  its  assistance,  we  can  frame 
the  Life  into  a  harmonious  whole,  then  its  claims  will  be  established 
even  in  the  exposition  of  the  Life  itself  t     Nay,  the  idea  of  Christ 

*"  Strauss,  iu  his  "  Lcben  Jesu"  (part  ii.,  p.  719),  has  drawn  a  just  distinction  between 
the  abstract  idea  of  human  perfection  which  is  involved  iu  oar  consciousness  of  sinfuhiess, 
and  seems  inseparable  from  our  natural  tendency  to  the  idea  of  God,  and  the  "  actual  (con- 
crete) working  out  of  the  picture,  with  the  traits  of  individual  reality."  In  relation  to  this 
last  he  says,  "  Such  a  faultless  picture  could  not  be  exhibited  by  a  sinful  man  in  a  sinfizl 
age;  but,"  adds  he,  "such  an  age,  itself  not  fVee  from  these  defects,  would  not  bo  conscious 
of  them  ;  and  if  the  picture  is  only  skc/cked,  and  stands  in  need  of  much  illustration,  it  may, 
even  in  a  later  and  more  clearsighted  age,  willing  to  aiTord  favorable  illustrations,  be  re 
garded  as  faultless."  In  opposition  to  this,  we  have  to  say  that  the  picture  of  the  Life  of 
Christ  which  has  been  handed  down  to  us  does  not  exhibit  the  spirit  of  that  age,  but  a  far 
higher  Spirit,  which,  manifesting  itself  in  the  lineaments  of  the  picture,  exerted  a  regen- 
erating influence  not  only  in  that  age,  but  on  all  succeeding  generations.  The  image  of  hu- 
man perfection,  concretely  presented  in  the  Life  of  Christ,  stands  in  manifold  contradiction 
to  the  tendencies  of  humanity  in  that  period  ;  no  one  of  them,  no  combination  of  them,  dead, 
as  they  were,  could  account  for  it.  Whence,'  then,  in  that  impure  age,  came  such  a  pic- 
ture (a  picture  which  the  age  itself  could  not  completelj'  understand,  of  which  the  age  could 
only  now  and  then  seize  a  congenial  trait  to  make  a  caiicature  of),  the  contemplating  of 
which  raised  the  human  rare  of  that  and  following  ages  to  a  new  developemeut  of  spiritual 
life  ?  Thestudy  of  this  picture  has  given  anew  view  of  the  destiny  of  humanity  ;  a  new  con- 
ception of  what  tire  ideal  of  human  virtue  should  be,  and  a  new  theory  of  morals:  all  which 
vanish,  however,  when  we  withdraw  our  gaze  from  its  lineaments.  The  spirit  of  ethics, 
which  had  taken  to  itself  only  certain  features  of  the  picture  broken  from  their  connexion 
with  the  whole,  and  was  corrupted  by  foreign  elements  that  had  bound  themselves  up  with 
the  Christian  consciousness,  was  imrified  again  iu  contemplating  the  nnmutilated  historical 
Prototype  in  the  days  of  the  Reformation.  And  whenever  the  spirit  of  the  age  cuts  itself 
loose,  cither  in  the  popular  turn  of  thought  or  in  the  schools  of  philosophy,  from  this  his- 
torical relation,  it  estranges  itself  also  from  the  ethics  of  Christianity,  and  sets  up  a  new 
and  dill'erent  ideal  of  perfection  from  that  which  the  revelation  of  Christ  has  grounded  in 
the  consciousness  of  man. 

So  much  for  what  Strauss,  1.  c,  and  Baur  (Gnosis,  p.  C55),  have  said  against  Schkier- 
mocker. 

t  T«f  iiToOiaiii  Ttoiovficvoi  uvk  ap\ai,  aWit  t'o  oiri  viroOcaeti,  oiov  iiriBdaeii  TC  nai  hpjiai,  as   Plato 

says,  Id  a  different  couiicxiun,  at  the  end  of  the  sixth  book  of  the  Republic. 


INTRODUCTION.  5 

which  has  come  down  to  \is  through  Christian  consciousness  (the  chief 
element  of  which  is  the  impress  which  He  himself  left  upon  the  souls 
of  the  Apostles)  will,  by  comparison  with  the  living  manifestation  [i.  e., 
of  Christ  in  his  life),  be  more  and  more  distinctly  defined  and  devel- 
oped in  its  separate  features,  and  more  and  more  freed  from  foreign 
elements. 

So  it  is  in  considering  the  life  of  any  man  who  has  materially  and 
beneficially  affected  the  progi'ess  of  the  race,  especially  if  the  results 
of  his  labours  have  touched  upon  our  own  interests.  We  form  in  ad- 
vance some  idea  of  such  a  man,  and  are  not  disposed,  from  any  doubt- 
ful acts  of  his  that  may  be  laid  before  us,  to  change  our  preconceived 
notion  for  an  opposite  one.  But  while  this  preconceived  idea  may  be 
our  guide  in  studying  the  life  of  such  a  man,  the  study  itself  will  con- 
tribute to  enlarge  and  rectify  the  individual  lineaments  of  the  picture. 

But  we  must  not  lose  sight  of  one  important  difference.  In  all  other 
men  there  is  a  contrast  between  the  ideal  and  the  phenomenal.  While 
in  many  of  their  traits  we  may  discern  the  Divine  principle  which 
forms  their  individuality,  the  archetype  of  their  manifestation  in  time, 
in  others  we  see  opposing  elements,  which  go  to  make  a  mere  cai-ica- 
ture  of  that  principle.  We  can  obtain  no  clear  view  of  the  aim  of  the 
life  of  such  men,  unless  we  can  seize  upon  the  higher  element  which 
forms  the  individual  character ;  just  as  an  artist  might  depict  accurately 
a  man's  organic  features,  and,  for  want  of  the  peculiar  intellectual  ex- 
l)ression,  fiiil  completely  in  giving  the  entire  living  physiognomy.  But 
without  a  conception  of  the  living  whole  we  could  not  detect  the  sep- 
arate features  which  mar  the  harmony  of  the  picture.  On  the  other 
side,  again,  if  we  contemplate  the  whole  apart  from  the  individual 
features,  we  shall  only  form  an  ai'bitrary  ideal,  not  at  all  corresponding 
to  the  reality. 

In  Christ,  however,  the  ideal  and  the  phenomenal  never  contradict 
each  other.  All  depends  upon  our  viewing  rightly  together  the  separate 
features  in  their  connexion  with  the  higher  unity  of  the  whole.  We 
2Jrcsi/j}j}ose  this  view  of  the  whole,  in  order  to  a  just  conception  of  the 
j)arts,  and  to  avoid  regarding  any  necessary  feature  in  the  light  of  a 
caricature.  This  can  the  more  easily  be  done,  as  the  phenomena 
which  we  are  here  to  contemplate  stand  alone,  and  can  be  compared 
with  no  other.  And  as,  even  in  studying  the  life  of  an  eminent  man, 
we  must  commune  with  his  spirit  in  order  to  obtain  a  complete  view 
of  his  being,  so  we  must  yield  ourselves  up  to  the  Spirit  of  Christ, 
whom  we  acknowledge  and  adore  as  exalted  above  us,  that  He  him- 
self may  show  us  his  Divine  image  in  the  mirror  of  his  Life,  and  teach 
us  how  to  distinguish  all  prejudices  of  our  own  creating  from  the  nec- 
essary laws  of  our  being. 


INTRODUCTION. 


CHAPTER  II. 

SOURCES  FOR  THE  HISTORY  OF  CHRIST. 
§  4.   Traditional  Origin  of  the  Synoptical  Gospels. 

IN  using  the  authorities,  I  shall  follow  the  general  rules  of  historical 
criticism,  and  seek  the  truth  by  comparing  the  individual  accounts 
with  themselves  and  with  each  other.  A  correct  judgment  of  the  nature 
of  the  authorities  may  be  derived  from  thus  examining  them  in  detail. 
The  settled  result  of  my  investigations  on  this  subject  maybe  stated 
as  follows :  The  historical  remains,  as  well  as  the  nature  of  the  case, 
show  that  the  writing  of  the  Gospel  history  did  not  originate  in  any 
design  to  give  a  connected  account  of  the  life  and  public  ministry  of 
Christ  as  a  whole,  but  rather  grew  out  of  a  series  of  traditional  ac- 
counts of  separate  scenes  in  his  history.  These  accounts  were  partly 
transmitted  by  word  of  mouth,  and  partly  laid  down  in  wi-itten  memoirs. 
The  commission  of  the  whole  to  writing  naturally  soon  followed  the 
spread  of  Christianity  among  the  Greeks,  a  people  much  accustomed 
to  writing.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  Paul  made  use  of  written 
memoirs  of  the  life  of  Christ.*  The  objections  of  Weisse  against  this 
view  are  of  no  importance.  Our  first  three  Gospels  resulted  from  the 
compilation  of  such  separate  materials,  as  Luke  himself  states  in  his 
introduction.!  Matthew's  Gospel,  in  its  present  form,  was  not  the  pro- 
duction of  the  apostle  whose  name  it  bears,  but  was  founded  on  an  ac- 
count written  by  him  in  the  Hebrew  language,  chiefly  (but  not  wholly) 
for  the  purpose  of  presenting  the  discourses  of  Christ  in  a  collective  form. 

§  5.  Genuineness  of  John's  Gospel. 
John's  Gospel,  which  contains  the  only  consecutive  account  of  the  la- 
bours of  Christ,  arose  in  a  very  different  way.  It  could  have  emanated 
ft-om  none  other  than  that  "  beloved  disciple"  upon  whose  soul  the  image 
of  the  Saviour  had  left  its  deepest  impress.  So  far  from  this  Gospel's  hav- 
ing been  written  by  a  man  of  the  second  century  (as  some  assert),  we  can- 
not even  imagine  a  man  existing  in  that  century  so  little  affected  by  the 
contrarieties  of  his  times  and  so  far  exalted  above  them.  Could  an  ago 
involved  in  perpetual  contradictions,  an  age  of  religious  materialism, 
anthropomorphism,  and  one-sided  intellectualism,  have  given  birth  to  a 
production  like  this,  which  bears  the  stamp  of  none  of  these  deformities'? 

•  See  my  Aposlul.  Geschickk',  3d  edit.,  p.  131.  t  Luke,  i..  I,  2. 


INTRODUCTION.  7 

How  mighty  must  the  man  have  been  who,  in  that  age,  could  produce 
from  his  own  mind  such  an  image  of  Christ  as  thisi  And  this  man, 
too,  in  a  period  almost  destitute  of  eminent  minds,  remained  in  total 
obscurity  !  Was  it  necessary  for  the  master-spirit,  who  felt  in  himself 
the  capacity  and  the  calling  to  accomplish  the  greatest  achievement  of 
his  day,  to  resort  to  a  pitiful  trick  to  smuggle  his  ideas  into  circula- 
tion? 

And  then,  too,  while  it  is  thought  sufficient  to  say  of  the  three  other 
Gospels  that  they  were  compiled  from  undesigned  fables,  we  are  told 
that  such  a  Gospel  as  this  of  John  was  the  work  of  sheer  invention, 
as  lately  T>r.  Baur  has  confessed,  with  praiseworthy  candour.  Strange 
that  a  man,  anxious  for  the  credit  of  his  inventions,  should,  in  the 
chronology  and  topography  of  his  Life  of  Christ,  give  the  lie  to  the 
Church  traditions  of  his  time,  instead  of  chiming  in  with  them ;  stran- 
ger still,  that,  in  spite  of  his  bold  contradiction  of  the  opinions  of  his 
ao-e  in  regard  to  the  history,  his  fraud  should  be  successful !  In  short, 
the  more  openly  this  criticism  declares  itself  against  the  Gospel  of 
John,  the  more  palpably  does  it  manifest  its  own  wilful  disregard  of 
history. 

.  §  6.  Results  of  Criticism. 

A  comparison  of  the  representation  of  Christ  derived  from  the  tra- 
ditions of  the  Apostolic  Church,  with  that  which  the  direct  and  person- 
al knowledge  of  the  beloved  disciple  affords  to  us,  will  not  only  aid  our 
freneral  conception  of  his  image  as  a  whole,  but  will  also  prove  the 
identity  of  these  two  representations  with  each  other,  from  their  agree- 
ment as  well  in  the  separate  features  as  in  the  general  picture. 

It  must  be  regarded  as  one  of  the  greatest  boons  which  the  purify- 
ing process  of  Protestant  theology  in  Germany  has  conferred  upon 
faith  as  well  as  science,  that  the  old,  mechanical  view  of  Inspiration 
has  been  so  generally  abandoned.  That  doctrine,  and  the  forced  har- 
monies to  which  it  led,  demanded  a  clerk-like  accuracy  in  the  evangel- 
ical accounts,  and  could  not  admit  even  the  slightest  contradictions  in 
them ;  but  we  are  now  no  more  compelled  to  have  recourse  to  subtil- 
ties  against  which  our  sense  of  truth  rebels.  In  studying  the  historical 
connexion  of  our  Saviour's  life  and  actions  by  the  application  of  an  un- 
fettered criticism,  we  reach  a  deeper  sense  in  many  of  his  sayings  than 
the  bonds  of  the  old  dogmatism  would  have  allowed.  The  inquiring 
reason  need  no  longer  find  its  free  sense  of  truth  opposed  to  faith ; 
nor  is  reason  bound  to  subjugate  herself,  not  to  faith,  but  to  arbitrary 
doo-mas  and  artificial  hypotheses.  The  chasms  in  the  Gospel  history 
were  unavoidable  in  the  transmission  of  Divine  truth  through  such 
lowly  human  means.  The  precious  treasure  has  come  to  us  in  earth- 
en vessels.     But  this  only  affords  room  for  the  exercise  of  our  faith — 


8  INTRODUCTION. 

a  faith  whose  root  is  to  be  found,  not  in  science,  not  in  demonstration, 
but  in  the  humble  and  self-denying  submission  of  our  spirits.  Our  sci- 
entific views  may  be  defective  in  many  points ;  our  knowledge  itself 
may  be  but  fragmentary ;  but  our  religious  interests  will  find  all  that 
is  necessary  to  attach  them  to  Christ  as  the  ground  of  salvation  and 
the  archetype  of  holiness. 


BOOK    I. 


BIRTH    AID    CHILDHOOD 


JESUS. 


BOOK  I. 
THE  BIRTH  AND  CHILDHOOD  OF  JESUS.* 


CHAPTER  I. 

PRELIMINARY  REMARKS. 

§  7,  Scantiness  of  our  Information  in  regard  to  tJiis  Period  of  Christ's 
Life. — Nothing  further  reallij  essential  to  the  Interests  of  Religion. 

IN  writing  the  life  of  any  eminent  man,  we  should  not  be  likely  to 
begin  with  a  period  when  his  character  was  fully  developed  and  his 
world-historical  importance  recognized.  On  the  contrary,  we  should 
study  the  growth  of  his  being — seek  for  the  bud  which  concealed  the 
seed,  and  the  powers  that  conspired  to  unfold  it. 

We  cannot  fail  to  have  the  same  desire  in  studying  that  Life  which 
far  transcends  every  other,  both  in  its  own  intrinsic  excellence  and  in 
its  bearing  upon  the  history  of  the  human  race  ;  but  we  are  kept  with- 
in very  narrow  limits  on  this  point  by  the  paucity  of  our  materials,  con- 
sisting, as  they  do,  of  fragmentary  accounts,  whose  literal  accuracy  we 
have  no  right  to  presuppose.  To  exhibit  these  features  in  the  life  of 
Christ  did  not  belong  to  the  Apostolic  mission,  which  was  designed  to 
meet  religious  rather  than  scientific  wants ;  to  relate  the  mighty  acts 
of  Christ,  from  the  beginning  of  his  ministry  to  the  time  of  his  ascension, 
rather  than  to  show  how,  and  under  what  conditions,  his  inner  nature 
gradually  manifested  itself.  It  belongs  to  science  to  give  a  pragmatico- 
genetical  developement  of  the  history;  reW^ions, faith  occupies  itself 
only  with  the  immediate  facts  themselves.  V/e  cannot  expect  this 
part  of  the  history  to  give  so  accurate  a  detail  as  that  which  treats  of 
Christ's  public  ministry  and  his  redemptive  acts ;  nor  do  the  wants  of 
faith  require  it. 

§  8.  Fundamentally  opposite  Modes  of  apprehending  the  Accounts. 

The  problems  offered  to  scientific  inquiry  at  this  point  are,  first,  to 
distinguish  the  objective  reality  of  the  events  from  the  subjective  form  in 
which  they  are  apprehended  in  the  accounts ;  and,  secondly,  to  fill  up, 
as  far  as  may  be,  the  chasms  which  necessarily  arise  in  the  history  froni 

*  I  do  not  enter  into  the  minute  researches  which  are  necessary  to  fix  the  exact  date  of 
Chiisfs  birth. 


12  OPPOSING  VIEWS  OF  THE  NARRATIVES. 

its  being  composed  of  detached  narratives.  These  problems  nearly  in- 
volve each  other  ;  for  we  must  obtain  a  clear  view  of  the  events  them- 
selves,before  we  can  solve  the  difficulties  that  arise  in  connecting  them 
together.  Of  these,  various  views  may  be  taken,  different  in  themselves, 
yet  each  in  harmony  with  the  interests  of  religion. 

But  this  cannot  be  said  o£ all  the  different  views  which  maybe  taken 
of  the  subject.  The  attempt  might  be  made,  for  instance,  to  explain 
the  life  of  Christ  just  as  that  of  any  eminent  man,  on  the  natural  prin- 
ciples of  human  devclopement ;  rejecting,  of  course,  the  first  truth  of 
Christian  belief  in  Christ  as  the  Son  of  God  and  our  Saviour.  This 
theory,  denying  the  supernatural  element  of  Christianity,  necessarily 
leads  its  advocates  to  consider  every  thing  in  the  Gospel  accounts 
which  contradicts  it  as  simply  mythical.  Thus,  even  in  what  may  be 
called  the  ante-historical  part  of  our  work,  we  find  arrayed  against  us 
those  views  which  always  reject  the  supernatural  in  the  events  of  the 
life  of  Christ;  although  this  is  a  dispute  which  cannot  be  settled  em- 
])irically  by  inquiries  into  the  separate  accounts ;  for  this  very  distinc- 
tion of  historical  and  non-historical  presupposes  a  final  decision  be- 
tween these  opposing  views  made  elsewhere.  Thus,  the  Deistic  and 
Pantheistic  theories,  which,  although  they  arise  from  directly  opjiosite 
modes  of  thought,  agree  perfectly  in  opposing  supernaturalism,  must 
deny,  in  the  outset,  what  the  supernatural-theistic  views  hold  to  be  es- 
sential to  the  idea  of  a  genuine  world-redeeming  Christ. 

We  must,  then,  in  order  to  bring  the  individual  features  into  harmo 
ny  with  our  portraiture  of  Chi'ist,  form  the  latter  definitely  from  a  view 
of  his  whole  life,  and  of  the  organism  of  that  Christian  consciousness 
which  grows  out  of  his  impress  left  upon  humanity,  and  manifests  his 
perpetual  revelation.  In  relation  to  the  individual  features  of  the  his- 
tory, it  only  remains  to  prove,  by  naked  historical  inquiry,  that  there  is 
no  sufficient  ground,  apart  from  the  general  prejudices  of  rationalism, 
to  deny  their  historical  basis  ;  and  to  show  that  the  origin  of  the  ac- 
counts themselves  cannot  be  explained  without  the  actual  occurrence 
of  the  events  which  they  describe  on  the  very  ground  where  they  arose. 


THE  MIRACULOUS  CONCEPTION.  13 


CHAPTER  11. 

THE  MIRACULOUS  CONCEPTION. 

§  9.   The  Miraculous  Conception  demanded  h.  priori,  and  confirmed 
a  posteriori. 

IF,  then,  we  conceive  the  manifestation  of  Christ  to  have  been  a  super- 
natural communication  of  the  Divine  nature  for  the  moral  renewal  of 
man,  a  new  beginning  in  the  chain  of  human  progress ;  in  one  word,  if 
we  conceive  it  as  a  miracle,  this  conception  itself,  apart  from  any  his- 
torical accounts,  would  lead  us  to  form  some  notion  of  the  beginning 
of  his  human  life  that  would  harmonize  with  it. 

It  is  true,  this  human  life  of  Christ  took  its  apj^ointed  place  in  the 
course  of  historical  events — nay,  all  history  was  arranged  with  refer- 
ence to  its  incoqooration ;  yet  it  entered  into  history,  not  as  part  of  its 
offspring,  but  as  a  higher  element.  Whatever  has  its  origin  in  the 
natural  course  of  humanity  must  bear  the  stamp  of  humanity ;  must 
share  in  the  sinfulness  which  stains  it,  and  take  part  in  the  strifes  which 
distract  it.  It  was  impossible,  therefore,  that  the  second  Adam,  the 
Divine  progenitor  of  a  new  and  heavenly  race,  could  derive  his  origin 
from  the  first  Adam  in  the  ordinary  course  of  nature,  or  could  repre- 
sent the  type  of  the  species,  the  people,  or  the  family  from  which  he 
sprung,  as  do  the  common  children  of  men.  We  must  conceive  him, 
not  as  an  individual  representative  of  the  type  which  descended  from 
our  first  parents,  but  as  the  creative  origin  of  a  new  type.  And  so  our 
own  idea  of  Christ  compels  us  to  admit  that  two  factors,  the  one  natu- 
ral, the  other  supernatural,  were  coefiicient  in  his  entrance  into  human 
life;  and  this,  too,  although  we  may  be  unable,  a  priori,  to  state  how 
that  entrance  was  accomplished. 

But  at  this  point  the  historical  accounts  come  to  our  aid,  by  testifying 
that  what  our  theory  of  the  case  requires  did,  in  fact,  occur.  The  es- 
sential part  of  the  history  is  found  precisely  in  those  features  in  which 
the  idea  and  the  reality  hai-monize ;  and  we  must  not  only  hold  fast 
these  essential  facts  which  are  so  important  to  the  interests  of  religion, 
but  carefully  distinguish  them  from  unimportant  and  accidental  parts, 
which  might,  perhaps,  be  involved  in  obscurity  or  contradiction. 

§  10.  Mythical  Vicio  of  tJie  Miraculous  Conception. — No  trace  of  it  in  the 

Narrative. — No  such  Mythus  could  leave  originated  among  the  Jews. 

The  accounts  of  Matthew  and  Luke  agree  in  stating  that  the  birth 

of  Christ  was  the  result  of  a  direct  creative  act  of  God,  and  not  of  the 

ordinary  laws  of  human  generation.     They  who  deny  this  must  make 


14  THE  MIRACULOUS  CONCEPTION. 

one  of  two  assumptions  ;  either  that  all  the  accounts  are  absolute 
fables,  or  that  some  actual  fact  was  the  ground- work  of  the  fabulous 
conception. 

Those  who  adopt  the  former  view  tell  us  that,  after  Christ  had  made 
himself  conspicuous  by  his  great  acts,  men,  struck  with  his  extraordi- 
nary character,  formed  a  theory  of  his  birth  to  correspond  with  it. 
But  this  assumption  is  utterly  irreconcilable  with  the  simple  and  pro- 
saic style  in  which  INIatthew  tells  the  story  of  Joseph's  perplexity  at 
finding  Mary  pregnant  before  her  time  ;*  and  the  supposition  that  this 
prosaic  narrative  was  tlie  offspring  of  some  previous  mythical  descrip- 
tion, is  out  of  all  harmony  with  the  character  of  the  primitive  Christian 
times.  As  for  the  second  assumption,  those  who  adopt  it  can  assign  no 
possible  fact  to  explain  the  origin  of  the  account,  but  one  of  so  base  a 
nature  as  utterly  to  shock  every  religious  feeling,  and  every  just  notion 
of  the  overruling  Providence  of  God,  Had  such  an  occurrence  ever 
been  deemed  possible,  the  fanatical  enemies  of  Christ  would  very  soon 
have  made  use  of  it.t  Both  these  assumptions  failing,  nothing  remains 
but  to  admit  that  the  birth  of  Christ  was  a  phenomenon  out  of  the  or- 
dinary course  of  nature.^ 

Nor  would  such  a  viythus  have  been  consistent  with  Jcuish  modes 
of  thought.  The  Hindoo  mind  might  have  originated  a  fable  of  this 
character,  though  in  a  different  form  from  that  in  which  the  account 
of  the  Evangelists  is  given  ;  but  the  Jewish  had  totally  different  ten- 
dencies. Such  a  fable  as  the  birth  of  the  INIessiah  from  a  virgin  could 
have  arisen  any  where  else  easier  than  among  the  Jews ;  their  doctrine 
of  the  Divine  Unity,  which  placed  an  impassable  gulf  between  God 
and  the  world  ;  their  high  regard  for  the  marriage  relation,  which  led 
them  to  abhor  unwedded  life ;  and,  above  all,  their  full  persuasion 
that  the  INIessiah  was  to  be  an  oi'dinary  man,  undistinguished  by  any 
thing  supernatural,  and  not  to  be  endowed  with  Divine  power  before 
the  time  of  his  solemn  consecration  to  the  Messiahship,  all  conspired  to 

*  We  cannot  believe,  notwithstanding  what  Strauss,  says  on  this  point  in  his  3d  edition, 
that  a  fable  could  originally  be  presented  in  so  prosaic  a  garb  as  that  of  Matthew.  Cases 
are  not  wanting,  liowever,  in  which  the  substance  of  a  mythus,  after  it  had  come  to  be  re- 
ceived as  history,  has  been  given  out  in  a  prosaic  form. 

t  They  would  have  done  so  before  Jewish  malevolence  employed  the  history  of  the 
miraculous  conception  to  invent  the  fable  which  Celsus  first  made  use  of — Grig.,  i.,  3-'. 
Had  any  such  legends  been  in  circulation  before,  we  should  find  some  trace  of  them  m  the 
Evangelists,  who  do  not  conceal  the  accusations  that  were  made  against  Cluist. 

X  Schlcicrmachcr,  whose  reverence  fm-  sacred  things  forbade  him  to  adopt  the  latter  of 
these  two  suppositions,  while  his  conscientious  love  of  tnitli  compelled  him  to  admit  the  reality 
of  the  history,  says,  in  comjiaring  the  statements  of  Matthew  and  Luke  (Critical  Inquiries, 
p.  47),  "  We  may  well  V:a.\e  the  statement  of  Matthew  in  the  judicious  indefiniteness  in 
which  it  is  expressed  ;  while  the  traditional  basis  of  the  poetical  announcement  in  Luke  re- 
bukes those  impious  explanations  which  soil  the  veil  they  cannot  lift."  But,  in  sober  tnith, 
no  one  can  admit  the  voracity  of  the  histoiy,  anil,  at  the  same  time,  deny  the  miraculous 
conception,  without  falling  into  the  very  conclusion  which  Schleiennachcr  rejects  with  suolj 
[lions  indignation. 


THE   MIRACULOUS  CONCEPTION.  15 

render  such  an  invention  impossible  among  them.  The  accounts  of 
Isaac,  Samson,  and  Samuel  cannot  he  quoted  as  in  point ;  these  cases 
rather  illustrate  the  Hebrew  notion  of  the  blessing  of  fruitfulness ;  and 
in  them  all  the  Divine  pow^er  was  shown,  not  in  excluding  the  male,  but 
in  rendering  the  long-barren  female  fruitful,  contrary  to  all  human  ex- 
pectation. The  conception  of  Christ  would  have  been  analoo-ous  to 
these,  had  Mary,  after  long  barrenness,  bonie  a  son,  or  had  Joseph 
been  too  old  to  expect  offspring  at  the  time.* 

It  was  on  this  very  account,  viz.,  because  the  miraculous  conception 
was  foreign  to  the  prevailing  Jewish  modes  of  thought,!  that  one  sect 
of  the  Ebionites,  who  could  not  free  themselves  from  their  old  preju- 
dices, refused  to  admit  the  doctrine  ;  and  the  section  which  contains 
the  account  is  excluded  from  the  Ebionitish  recension  of  the  Gospel  to 
the  Hebrews,  which  arose  from  the  same  source  as  our  Matthew.  As 
for  the  single  obscure  passage  in  Isa.,  vii.,  it  could  hardly  have  given 

*  E.  g-.,  in  the  apocrj-phal  Gospel  of  James,  cli.  ix.,  it  is  stated,  that  when  the  priest 
was  about  to  give  Mary  as  a  wife  to  the  aged  Josepli,  the  latter  said,  "  I  have  sons  and 
am  old,  while  she  is  yet  young  ;  shall  I  not  then  become  a  mockery  for  the  sons  of  Israel  ?" 

t  Professor  IVeisse,  in  his  work,  "Die  Evangelische  Geschichte"  (The  Gospel  History, 
critically  and  philosophically  ti'eated,  Leips.,  1838),  admits  that  the  Jews  could  not  have  in- 
vented this  rnythus,  but  ascribes  to  it  a  heathen  origin.  How,  in  view  of  the  relations  that 
subsisted  between  early  Christianity  and  heathenism,  the  pagan  mythus  of  the  sons  of  the  gods 
could  so  soon  have  been  transformed  into  a  Christian  one  ;  and  how  the  latter  could  have 
found  its  way  into  St.  Matthew's  Gospel,  which  unquestionably  had  a  Jewish-Christian 
origin,  are  among  the  incomprehensibilities  which  abound  in  Prof  W.'s  very  intelligible 
work.  He  says,  p.  178,  that  "  as  Paul  found  himself  involuntarily  compelled,  in  addressing 
the  Athenians,  to  quote  Greek  poetry  (For  ice  are  also  his  offspring,  Acts,  xvii.,  08),  so  it 
is  possible  that  the  apostles  to  the  heathen  were  led  to  adopt  the  pagan  mythus  of  the  sons 
of  tlie  gods,  in  order  to  make  known  to  them  the  truth,  that  Christ  is  the  Son  of  God,  in  a 
form  suited  to  tlieir  way  of  thinking,  and  that  their  figurative  language,  literally  understood, 
formed  the  starting-point  for  such  a  mythus."  Things  veiy  heterogeneous  are  thrown  to- 
gether in  this  passage.  What  religious  scruples  need  have  hindered  Paul  from  alluding  to 
the  consciousness  of  the  Divine  origin  of  the  human  race,  which  the  Athenians  themselves 
hadtfkpressed,  and  to  the  vague  idea  which  they  entertained  of  an  unknown  God  ?  Nor 
was  such  an  allusion  likely  to  be  misunderstood.  How  could  a  man,  imbued  with  Jewish 
feelings  in  regard  to  the  heathen  mythology  (feelings  which  his  conversion  to  Christianity 
would  by  no  means  weaken),  compare  the  birth  of  the  Holy  One — of  the  Messiah — with 
those  pagan  fables,  whose  impurity  could  inspire  him  with  nothing  but  disgust  ?  Weisse 
iias  transferred  his  own  mode  of  contemplating  the  heathen  myths  to  a  people  that  would 
have  revolted  from  it. 

It  is  quite  another  thing  when  Weisse  adduces  the  comparisons  in  which  the  early  Chris- 
tian apologists  indulged.  These  men,  themselves  of  heathen  origin,  were  accustomed  to 
the  allegorical  interpretations  of  the  mythology,  and  it  was  natural  for  them  to  seek  and  oc- 
cupy a  position  intemiediate  between  their  earlier  and  later  \-iews.  But,  so  far  from  these 
comparisons  havmg  given  rise  to  the  accounts  of  the  supernatural  conception,  it  was  the 
latter  which  caused  the  fomier.  They  wished  to  show  to  the  heathen  that  this  miraculous 
event  was  not  altogether  foreign  to  their  own  religious  ideas,  while  they  cai'efully  guarded 
against  tiie  sensuous  foniis  of  thought  involved  m  the  myths  ;  and,  as  they  could  pi-esuppo.se 
this  event,  they  had  a  right  to  employ  the  myths  as  they  did,  inasmuch  as  these  poetical  ef- 
fusions of  natural  religion  anticipated  (though  in  sadly-distorted  caricatures)  the  great  truth 
of  Christianity,  that  the  union  of  the  Divine  with  the  human  nature  was  brought  about  by 
a  creative  act  of  Omnipotence.  The  early  apologists  expressed  this  in  their  own  way  : 
"  Satan  invented  these  fables  by  imitating  the  truth." 


16  THE  MIRACULOUS  CONCEPTION. 

rise  to  such  a  tradition  among  the  people  of  Palestine,  where,  unques- 
tionably, Matthew's  Gospel  originated. 

§  11.  Objections  to  the  Narrative  drawn  from  the  subsequent  Disposi- 
tions of  Christ's  Relatives,  ansioered  {Vjfram  the  nature  of  the  case  ; 
(2)  frovi  the  name  Jesus. 

An  objection  to  the  credibility  of  the  nan-ative  has  been  raised  on 
the  ground  that  if  such  events  had  really  preceded  the  birth  of  Christ, 
his  own  relatives  would  have  been  better  disposed  to  recognize  him  as 
the  Messiah.  It  is  possible  that  the  circumstances  of  his  birth  (ZiJ  raise 
their  expectations  to  a  lofty  pitch ;  but  as  for  thirty  years  no  indica- 
tions corresponding  with  ordinary  views  of  the  Messiah  manifested 
themselves,  their  first  impressions  gradually  wore  away,  only  to  be  re- 
vived, however,  by  the  great  acts  which  Jesus  performed  after  the 
opening  of  his  public  career.  And  as  for  Mary  (in  whom  a  doubt  of 
this  sort  would  appear  still  more  strange,  as  she  was  directly  cognizant 
of  the  miraculous  features  of  the  history),  there  is  no  proof  whatever 
that  she  ever  lost  the  memory  of  her  visions,  or  relinquished  the  hopes 
they  were  so  well  calculated  to  raise.  Her  conduct  at  the  marriage  of 
Cana  proves  directly  the  reverse.  She  obviously  expected  a  miracle 
from  Christ  immediately  after  the  proclamation  of  his  Messiahship  by 
John  the  Baptist.  The  confirmation  which  John's  Gospel,  by  its  re- 
cital of  this  miracle,  affords  to  the  other  evangelists  is  the  more  stri- 
king, as  John  himself  gives  no  account  of  the  events  accompanying  the 
birth  of  Christ.* 

"  (a)  Julin's  silence  in  regard  to  the  miraculous  conception  is  no  proof  that  he  was  either 
ignorant  of  the  accounts  of  that  event  or  disbelieved  them.  His  object  was  to  testify  to 
what  he  had  himself  seen  and  heard,  and  to  declare  how  the  glory  of  the  Only  begotten 
liad  been  anveilcd  to  him  in  contemplating  Christ's  manifestation  on  earth.  But  that  he 
recognized  the  miraculous  conception  is  evident  from  his  emphatic  declarations  (in  oppo- 
sition to  the  ordinary  Jewish  idea  of  the  Messiah),  that  the  Divine  and  the  human  were 
oriGfinally  united  in  the  person  of  Christ,  and  that  the  Logos  itself  became  flesh  in  him  ; 
while  at  the  same  time  ho  avers  that  "  that  which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is  flesh."  No  man 
could  hold  these  two  ideas  together  without  believing  in  the  immediate  agency  of  God  in 
the  generation  of  Christ,  (b)  The  objection  that  Jesus  was  known  among  the  Jews  as 
the  son  of  Joseph  and  Mary,  and  that  this  fact  was  adduced  against  his  claims,  has  been 
siiiBciently  met  in  the  text ;  but  it  has  been  urged  further  that  Christ  himself,  when  this 
objection  was  brought  against  him  (Matt.,  xiii.,  55),  did  not  allude  to  the  miraculous  con- 
ception. As  to  this,  we  need  only  say  that  it  was  far  more  likely  and  natural  that  Jesus 
should  call  men's  attention  to  the  pi'oofs  of  his  Divinity  which  were  before  their  eyes  in  his 
daily  acts,  showing,  at  the  same  time,  that  the  causes  of  their  disbelief  lay  in  themselves, 
rather  tlian  that  he  slwuld  dwell  upon  the  circumstances  which  preceded  his  birth,  the 
[)i-oof  of  which  had  to  rest  upon  the  testimony  of  Mai-y  alone,  (c)  Nor  is  Paul's  silence  on 
this  point  proof  of  his  not  aduiowledging  it.  It  only  shows  that,  for  his  religious  sense, 
the  RuITorings  and  resurrection  of  Christ,  the  centre  and  support  of  the  Christian  system, 
stood  oat  more  prominently  than  the  miraculous  conception.  In  the  jjassagcs  in  wliicli  lie 
speaks  of  Christ's  origin,  he  had  a  dilforent  object  in  view  than  to  treat  of  this  subject ;  e.  p., 
in  Ilom.,  ix.,  5,  "  Whose,  are  the  fathers,  and  of  u-iunn,  as  concerning  the  flesh,  Christ  came, 
who  IS  overall,  God  blessed  forever ;"  and  in  ilom.,  i.,  4,  where  he  brings  out  prominently  the 


THE  MIRACULOUS  CONCEPTION.  17 

The  name  Jesus  itself  affords  additional  proof  that  his  parents  were 
led  by  some  extraordinary  circumstances  to  expect  that  he  would  be 
the  Messiah,  Such  names  as  Theodorus,  Theodoret,  Dorotheus,  among 
the  Greeks,  were  usually  bestowed  because  the  parents  had  obtained 
a  son  after  long  desire  and  expectation.  As  names  were  also  given 
among  the  Jews  with  reference  to  their  significancy,  and  as  the  name 
Jesus  betokens  "  Him  through  whom  Jehovah  bestows  salvation ;" 
and,  moreover,  as  the  Messiah,  the  bearer  of  this  salvation,  was  gen- 
erally expected  at  the  time,  it  must  certainly  appear  probable  to  us 
that  the  name  was  given  with  reference  to  that  expectation.  Not  that 
this  conclusion  necessarily  follows,  because  the  name  Jesus,  Joshua, 
was  common  among  the  Jews ;  but  yet,  compared  with  the  accounts, 
it  certainly  affords  confirmatory  evidence.  ; 

§  12.  Analogical  Ideas  among  the  Heathen. 

Moreover,  inferences  in  favour  of  the  accounts  of  the  miraculous 
conception,  as  well  as  against  them,  may  be  obtained  by  comparing 
them  with  the  ancient  myths  of  other  religions.  The  spirit  of  the  pa- 
gan mythology  could  not  have  penetrated  among  the  Jews,  and  there- 
fore cannot  be  assigned  to  explain  the  similarity  between  the  Chris- 
tian and  pagan  views.  We  must  seek  that  explanation  rather  in  the 
relations  that  subsist  between  mythical  natural  religion  and  historical  re- 
vealed religion ;  between  the  idea,  forming,  from  the  enslaved  conscious- 
ness which  it  sways,  an  untrue  actualization  ;  and  the  idea,  grounded  in 
truth,  and  developing  itself  therefrom  into  clear  and  free  consciousness. 

The  truth  which  the  religious  sense  can  recognize  at  the  bottom  of 
these  myths,  is  the  earnest  desire,  inseparable  from  man's  spirit,  for 
communion  with  God,  for  participation  in  the  Divine  nature  as  its  true 
life — its  anxious  longing  to  pass  the  gulf  which  separates  the  God-de- 
rived soul  from  its  original — its  wish,  even  though  unconscious,  to  se- 
cure that  union  Avith  God  which  alone  can  renew  human  nature,  and 
which  Christianity  shows  us  as  a  living  reality.  Nor  can  we  be  aston- 
ished to  find  the  facts  of  Christianity  thus  anticipated  in  poetic  forms 
(imbodying  in  imaginative  ci'eations  the  innate  yet  indistinct  cravings 
of  the  spirit)  in  the  mythical  elements  of  the  old  religions,  when  we  re- 

two-fold  manifestation  of  Christ,  as  the  Son  of  David  and  as  the  Son  of  God,  raised  above 
all  human  and  national  relationships,  as  he  revealed  himself  after  the  resurrection.  If  we 
could  infer  from  such  passages  Paul's  disbelief  in  the  miracle,  vre  can  draw  precisely  the 
opposite  conclusion  from  Gal.,  iv.,  4  ;  although,  as  the  case  is,  we  do  not  lay  much  stress 
upon  the  expression,  "bom  of  a  woman."  And  if  Paul  could  represent  Jesus  as  the  Son 
of  God  from  heaven,  as  being  without  sin  in  the  flesh  (aap\),  in  which  sin  before  had  reign- 
ed, while  at  the  same  time  he  taught  the  propagation  of  sinfulness,  from  Adam  down,  it  is 
likely  that  the  supernatural  generation  of  Jesus  was  so  firmly  established  in  the  connexion 
of  his  own  thoughts,  that  he  felt  the  less  necessity  to  give  it  individual  prominence.  We 
shall  have  occasion  to  make  a  similar  remark  hereafter  in  regard  to  the  omission  of  the  ac- 
count of  Christ's  ascension  as  an  individual  event. 


18  THE  MIRACULOUS  CONCEPTION, 

member  that  human  nature  itself,  and  all  the  forms  of  its  dcvelopement, 
as  well  as  the  whole  course  of  human  history,  were  intended  by  God 
to  find  their  full  accomplishment  in  Christ.  But  the  genius  of  Chris- 
tianity is  mistaken  by  those  who  despise  the  simplicity  of  the  Gospel 
history,  and  contrast  it  with  the  poetry  of  religion.  The  opposition, 
apparently  essential  to  the  mere  natural  man,  between  poetry,  trans- 
cending the  limits  of  the  actual,  and  the  prose  of  common  reality,  is 
taken  away  by  the  manifestation  of  Christ,  and  will  be  done  away 
wherever  Christianity  passes  into  flesh  and  blood.  The  peculiarity  of 
Christian  ethics  is  indeed  founded  upon  this. 

The  characteristic  difference  between  the  religion  of  Theism  and  that 
of  the  old  mythology  lies  in  this  one  point:  that  in  the  evangelical  his- 
tories the  Divine  power  is  represented  as  operating  immediately,  and 
not  by  the  interposition  of  natural  causes;  while,  in  the  mythical  con- 
ceptions, the  Divine  causality  is  made  coefficient  with  natural  agencies  ; 
the  Divine  is  brought  down  to  the  sphere  of  the  natural,  and  its  mani- 
festation is  thus  physically  explained.*  Thus  the  Gospel  histories,  pre- 
cisely as  a  just  idea  of  Christ  would  lead  us  to  presuppose,  attribute  to 
the  creative  ardency  of  God  alone  the  introduction  of  that  new  member 
of  humanity  through  which  the  regeneration  of  the  race  is  to  be  ac- 
complished. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE  BIRTH  OF  CHRIST. 
§  13.   The  Birth  of  Christ  in  its  Relations  to  the  Jewish  Theocracy. 

AS  the  entrance  of  Christ  into  the  course  of  humanity  was  brought 
about  by  the  co-working  of  supernatural  with  natural  elements,  so 
both  these  agencies  conspired  in  preparing  the  way  for  that  great  event, 
the  centre  of  all  things,  and  the  aim  of  all  preceding  history.  So  we 
interpret  the  relations  of  the  Jews  and  heathens  to  the  appearance  of 
Christ.  The  natural  dcvelopement  of  the  heathen  was  destined,  under 
the  Divine  guidance,  to  prepare  them  for  receiving  the  new  light  which 
emanated  from  Jesus  ;  and  the  history  of  the  Jewish  people  was  all  pre- 
paratory to  the  appearance  and  ministry  of  Christ,  who  was  to  come 
forth  out  of  their  midst.     This  preparation  was  accomplished  by  means 

*  BaumgaricTi-Crusiiis  lias  noticed  this  distinction  in  his  Biblical  Theology,  p.  397  ;  but 
fi/rauxg  denies  it,  and  asserts  that  the  expression  viAs  Qcov  in  Luke  i.,  35,  is  to  be  taken  en- 
tirely in  a  physical  sense.  There  is  no  such  moaning  in  the  passage ;  it  predicates  the 
terms  "  the  holy  our,"  "  the  Son  of  God,"  of  Christ,  on  the  ground  of  tlie  special  agency 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  his  birth.  He  who  was  conceived  under  such  an  agency  nui^t  stand 
in  a  special  relation  to  God.  Not  merely  the  Jewish  mode  of  thinking  on  tlie  subject,  btit 
also  the  fact  that  Jesus  is  designated  both  as  the  Son  of  David  and  the  Son  of  GoD.  ex- 
clude the  physical  interpretation. 


THE  BIRTH  OF  CHRIST.  19 

of  a  chain  of  separate,  but  organically  connected  revelations,  all  tend- 
ing toward  the  full  revelation  in  Him,  whose  whole  life  was  itself  to  be 
the  highest  manifestation  of  God  to  man. 

There  was  peculiar  fitness  in  Christ's  being  born  among  the  Jewisli 
people.  His  life  revealed  the  kingdom  of  God,  which  was  to  be  set 
up  over  all  men,  and  it  properly  commenced  in  a  nation  whose  polit- 
ical life,  always  developed  in  a  theocratic  form,  was  a  continual  typo 
of  that  kingdom.  He  was  the  culminating  point  of  this  developement ; 
in  Him  the  kingdom  of  God,  no  longer  limited  to  this  single  people, 
was  to  show  its  true  design,  and,  unfettered  by  physical  or  national  re- 
straints, to  assert  its  authority  over  the  whole  human  race.  The  par- 
ticular typifies  the  universal;  the  earthly,  the  celestial;  so  David,  the 
monarch  who  had  raised  the  political  theocracy  of  the  Jews  to  the  pin- 
nacle of  glory,  typified  that  greater  monarch  in  whom  the  kingdom  of 
God  was  to  display  its  glory.  Not  without  reason,  therefore,  was  it 
that  Christ,  the  summit  of  the  theocracy,  sprang  from  the  fallen  line  of 
royal  David.* 

§  14.    The  Miractdous  Events  that  accompanied  the  Birth  of  Christ. 

The  Divine  purpose  in  the  supernatural  conception  of  Jesus  could 
not  have  been  accomplished  without  some  providential  forewarnings 
to  his  parents ;  nor  could  these  intimations  of  the  certainty  of  the  ap- 
proaching birth  of  the  theocratic  King  have  been  given  by  ordinary, 
natural  means.  In  the  spnere  of  the  greatest  miracle  of  human  history, 
the  miracle  which  was  to  raise  mankind  to  communion  with  Heaven, 
we  do  not  wonder  to  see  rays  of  light  streaming  from  the  invisible 
world,  at  other  times  so  dark. 

*  However  the  discrepancies  in  the  two  genealogies  of  Christ  may  be  explained,  his  de- 
scent from  the  race  of  David  was  admitted  from  the  beginning,  and  the  evangelists  took  it 
for  granted  as  indisputable.  How  We'me  should  deny  this,  as  he  does  (p.  1G9),  is  unac- 
countable. His  arguments  can  convince  no  one  endowed  with  the  slightest  powers  of  ob- 
sei'vation,  and  need  no  answer.  The  only  one  wliich  is  at  all  plausible  is  that  founded  on 
Mark,  xii.,  G.'J ;  and  that  depends  upon  the  question  whether  Mark  uses  these  words  in  their 
original  application;  a  question  which  we  shall  hereafter  have  occasion  to  examine.  Cer- 
tainly, if  they  admit  of  more  than  one  interpretation,  we  shall  adopt  any  other  sooner  than 
that  which  comes  into  conflict  with  Paul,  who  assumed  Christ's  descent  from  David  as  cer- 
tain. Could  the  apostles  have  embraced  a  notion  which  the  Saviour  himself  had  denounced 
as  an  invention  of  the  scribes  ?  There  was  nothing  in  Paul's  turn  of  feeling  or  thought  to 
incline  him  towards  it,  had  it  not  been  established  on  other  gi-ounds  ;  on  the  conti'ary,  the 
doctrine  that  Christ  was  not  the  Sou  of  David,  but  the  Son  of  God  and  the  Lord  of  David, 
would  have  afforded  him  an  excellent  point  of  attack  against  Judaism.  Although  Luke's 
genealogy  is  not  directly  stated  as  following  the  line  of  Mary,  yet  it  may  have  done  so,  and 
have  only  been  improperly  placed  where  it  is.  Justin  Martyr  (Dial.  c.  Tryph.,  f.  327)  \v»% 
acquainted  with  such  a  genealogy  refening  to  Mary.  Luke,  i.,  32-35,  seems  to  show  that 
Mary  was  of  David's  race.  Her  relationship  to  Elizabeth,  the  mother  of  John  Baptist,  docs 
not  prove  the  contrai-y ;  for  members  of  the  ti'ibe  of  Levi  were  not  restrained  from  inter 
marriage  with  other  tribes;  and  EUzabeth,  although  of  that  tribe  on  the  father's  side,  and 
herself  the  wife  of  a  priest,  might  very  well  have  sprung  from  the  tribe  of  Judah  on  the 
mother's  side.  ^ 


20  THE  BIRTH  OF  CHRIST. 

From  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  we  can  expect  no  full  account  of 
those  extraordinary  manifestations  of  which,  naturally  enough,  Mary 
alone  could  testify*  But  a  mere  mythus,  destitute  of  historical  truth, 
and  only  serving  as  the  veil  of  an  ideal  truth,  is  a  very  different  thing 
from  what  we  are  here  stating,  viz.,  that  a  lofty  history  may  be  im- 
parted in  a  form  which  must  have  more  than  its  mere  literal  force ; 
and  that  events  of  a  lofty  character  necessarily  impart  their  higher  tone 
to  the  language  in  which  they  are  conveyed.  In  this  latter  case,  we 
may  harmlessly  differ  in  our  modes  of  arranging  the  materials,  and  of 
filling  uj)  the  chasms  of  the  history,  so  that  we  only  hold  fast  the  substan- 
tial facts  which  form  its  basis.  The  course  of  the  events  described  in 
Matt.,  i.,  18-25,  may  be  arranged  as  follows :  When  Mary  informed 
Joseph  of  the  remarkable  communication  that  had  been  made  to  her, 
he  could  not  at  once  bring  himself  to  believe  it ;  which  was  not  at  all 
strange,  considering  its  extraordinary  character,  and  how  little  he  was 
prepared  for  it.  A  struggle  ensued  in  his  feelings,  and  then  occurred 
the  night  vision  which  brought  his  mind  to  a  final  decision.t 

§  15.  TJie  Taxing. — Birth  of  Christ  at  Bethlehem, 
By  a  remarkable  interposition  of  Providence,  interwoven,  however, 
with  the  course  of  events  in  the  world,  was  it  brought  about  that  the 
promised  King  should  be  born  in  Bethlehem  (as  Micah  the  prophet 
had  foretold),  the  very  place  where  the  house  of  David  had  its  origin ; 
while,  at  the  same  time,  the  lowly  circumstances  of  his  birth  were  in 
striking  contrast  with  the  inherent  dignity  and  glory  that  were  veiled 
in  the  new-born  child. 

The  Emperor  Augustus  had  ordered  a  general  census  of  the  Roman 
Empire,  partly  to  obtain  correct  statistics  of  its  resources,^  and  partly 
lor  purposes  of  taxation.§  As  Judea  was  then  a  dependency  of  the 
empire,  and  Augustus  probably  intended  to  reduce  it  entirely  to  the 

*  Mary  could  only  have  been  taught  to  expect  the  Saviour  in  a  way  harmonizing  with 
her  views  at  the  time,  and  with  the  prevailing  Jewish  ideas  of  the  Messiah,  viz.,  that  the 
Messiali  should  come  of  the  line  of  David,  to  establish  an  everlasting  kingdom  among  the 
.Tews.  But  this  was  only  a  covering  for  the  higher  idea  of  the  Redeemer,  the  founder  of 
the  eternal  kingdom  of  God. 

t  We  need  be  the  less  afraid  of  a  free,  unliteral  interpretation  when  we  find  a  difference 
in  the  subjective  conception  of  these  events  by  even  the  evangelists  themselves,  Matthew 
speaking  only  of  dreams  and  visions,  and  Luke  of  objective  phenomena,  viz.,  the  appear- 
ance of  angels. 

\  This  was  not  confined  to  the  Roman  provinces,  but  extended  also  to  the  Socii. — Tacit., 
Ann.,  i.,  xi. 

§  Cassiodor.,  i.,  iii.,  ep.  52:  Au^nsli  Icmporihus  orbis  Romanus  affris  dirisus  cenfvgtie 
descriplus,  ut  posscssio  sui  nuUi  habcret.ur  incerta,  quam  pro  tributorum  suscipcret  quanti- 
tatibui  Kolvcnd^im.  (Conf.  Savif^ny's  dissertation  in  the  "  Zeitschrift  fiir  die  geschichtL 
Rechtswissonschaft,  Bd.  vi.,  H.  3.)  This  language  of  the  learned  statesman  shows  that 
he  followed  olilor  accounts  rather  than  a  Christian  report  drawn  from  Luke;  and  the  ex- 
pression of  Tacitus  wmlinns  this  conclusion.  There  is  no  ground,  therefore,  for  the  doubts 
etartcd  by  t>lrauss,  3d  od.,  p.  257. 


THE  BIRTH  OF  CHRIST.  21 

state  of  a  Roman  province,  he  wished  to  secure  similar  statistics  of  that 
country,  and  ordered  King  Herod  to  take  the  census.  In  performing 
this  duty,  Herod  followed  the  Jewish  usage,  viz.,  a  division  by  tribes.* 
Joseph  and  Mary  belonged  to  the  tribe  of  David,  and  therefore  had  to 
repair  to  Bethlehem,  the  seat  of  that  tribe.  On  account  of  the  throng, 
they  could  find  no  shelter  but  a  stable,  and  the  new-born  infant  had  to 
be  laid  in  a  manger.f 

§  IG.  The  Announcement  to  the  Sliephcrds. 
It  is  in  accoidance  with  the  analogy  of  history  that  great  manifesta- 
tions and  epochs,  designed  to  satisfy  the  spiritual  wants  of  ages,  should 
be  anticipated  by  the  prophetic  yearnings  of  pure  and  susceptible 
hearts,  inspired  by  a  secret  Divine  consciousness.  All  great  events 
that  have  introduced  a  new  developement  of  human  history  have  been 
preceded  by  unconscious  or  conscious  prophecy.      This   may  seem 

*  Luke's  account  of  the  matter  is  so  prosaic  and  straightforvravd,  that  none  but  a  preju- 
diced mind  can  find  a  trace  of  the  mythical  iu  it.  Examine  the  Apocryphal  Gospels,  and 
you  will  see  the  difference  betv/ecn  history  and  fable.  And  even  if  it  could  be  shown  that 
the  census  was  incorrect,  and  that  the  gatherings  at  Bethlehem  was  due  to  some  other 
cause,  no  suspicion  would  thereby  be  cast  upon  the  entire  narration ;  the  only  reasonable 
conclusion  would  be,  that  Luke,  or  the  writer  from  whom  he  copied,  had  fallen  into  an 
anachronism,  or  an  erroneous  combination  of  facts,  in  assigning  the  census  as  the  cause  of 
the  gathering.  Such  an  en-or  could  not  affect  in  any  way  the  interests  of  religion.  More- 
over, what  right  have  we  to  demand  of  Luke  so  exact  a  knowledge  of  the  history  of  his 
times,  in  things  that  did  not  materially  concern  his  purpose  ?  Such  anaclironisms,  in  things 
indifferent,  are  common  to  writers  of  all  ages.  But  the  account  itself  contains  no  marks  of 
improbability.  The  emperor  would  naturally  order  Herod,  whom  he  srill  recognized  as 
king,  to  take  the  census,  and  Herod  as  naturally  followed  the  Jewish  usage  in  doing  it. 
It  was  the  policy  of  the  emperor,  at  that  time,  to  treat  the  Jews  with  kindness,  and  there- 
fore he  would  naturally  make  the  first  attempt  at  a  census  as  delicately  as  possible.  How 
repugnant  such  a  measure  was  to  them  is  shown  by  .Josephus's  account  of  the  tumults  that 
arose  on  account  of  the  census  under  Quirinus,  twelve  years  afterward.  Luke  may  have 
gone  too  far  in  extending  (as  his  language  seems  to  implj')  the  census  over  the  whole  em- 
pire ;  or,  perhaps,  in  stating  the  gradual  census  of  the  whole  empire  as  a  simultanemn 
one.  Perhaps  he  mistook  this  assessment  for  the  census  which  occuired  twelve  years 
later,  and  on  that  accomit  erroneously  mentioned  Quirinus.  Nevertheless,  Cluiriuus  may 
have  been  actually  present  at  this  assessment,  not,  indeed,  as  governor  of  the  province,  but 
as  imperial  commissioner ;  for  Josephus  expressly  says  that  he  had  held  many  other  offices 
before  he  was  Governor  of  Syria,  at  the  time  of  the  second  census.  I  do  not  agree  with 
any  of  the  explanations,  either  ancient  or  modern,  which  attempt  to  make  Luke's  state- 
ment agree  exactly  with  history ;  they  all  seem  to  me  to  be  forced  and  unphilological , 
while  the  want  of  exactness  iu  Luke  is  easily  explained,  and  is  of  no  manner  of  importance 
for  the  object  which  ho- had  in  view. 

t  The  tiadition  in  Justin  Martyr  (Dial.  c.  Tryph.,  304,  a),  that  they  found  shelter  in  a 
cave  near  the  town,  which  had  before  been  used  for  a  cattle  stall  {"  oirtjXaiu)  rtvi  ovicyyvi 
His  KiinJis),  may  be  true,  although  we  should  not  like  to  vouch  for  it.  It  is  more  likely  tliat 
the  prophecy  in  Isai.,  xxxiii.,  16  (which  Justin  refers  to  iu  the  Alexandrian  version),  was 
applied  to  this  tradition  after  it  arose,  than  that  the  tradition  arose  from  the  prophecy.  At 
that  time  men  were  accustomed  to  find  every  where  in  the  Old  Testament  predictions  and 
types  of  Christ,  whether  warranted  by  the  connexion  or  not.  The  tradition  does  not  speci- 
fy such  a  cave  as  the  passage  in  Isaiah  would  lead  one  to  expect,  nor,  indeed,  does  the 
passage  seem  distinctly  to  refer  to  the  Messiah. 


■22  THE  CHILDHOOD  OF  CHRIST. 

strange  to  such  as  ascribe  to  God  the  apatliy  of  the  Stoics,  or  who  be- 
lieve only  in  the  cold,  iron  necessity  of  an  immanent  spirit  of  nature ; 
but  to  none  who  believe  in  a  personal,  self-conscious  Deity,  a  God  of 
eternal  love,  who  is  nigh  unto  every  man,  and  listens  willingly  to  the 
secret  sighs  of  longing  souls,  can  it  appear  unworthy  of  such  a  Being 
to  foreshadow  great  world-historical  epochs  by  responding  to  such 
longings  in  special  revelations. 

Far  more  probable,  then,  would  such  manifestations  be,  in  reference 
to  the  highest  object  of  human  longings,  the  greatest  of  all  world- 
historical  phenomena  ;  and  so,  at  the  time  of  CuRrsT's  coming,  the 
people  of  Judca,  guided  by  the  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament, 
yearned  for  the  appearance  of  the  Messiah  with  an  anxiety  only  ren- 
dered more  intense  by  the  oppressions  under  which  they  groaned. 
This  feeling  wouhl  naturally  be  kept  alive  in  Bethlehem,  associated  as 
the  place  was  with  recollections  of  the  family  of  David,  from  which 
the  Messiah  was  to  come.  So,  even  among  the  shepherds,  who  kept 
nightly  watch  over  the  flocks,  were  some  who  anxiously  awaited  the 
appearance  of  the  Messiah.  It  is  true,  the  account  does  not  say  that 
the  shepherds  thus  longed  for  the  Messiah.  But  we  are  justified  by 
Avhat  followed  in  presupposing  it  as  the  ground  for  such  a  communica 
t Ion's  being  especially  made  to  them  ;  and  it  is  not  unlikely  that  these 
simple  souls,  untaught  in  the  traditions  of  the  scribes,  and  nourished 
by  communion  with  God,  amid  the  freedom  of  nature,  in  a  solitude 
(congenial  to  meditation  and  prayer,  had  formed  a  purer  idea  of  the 
Messiah,  from  the  necessities  of  their  own  hearts,  than  prevailed  at  that 
time  among  the  Jews.  A  vision  from  Heaven  conducted  them  on  that 
night,  so  big  with  interest  to  man's  salvation,  to  the  place  where  the 
object  of  their  desire  was  to  be  born.* 

*  Justly  and  beautifully  sajs  Sckleiermnrher,  "  Tlicre  is  something  remarkable,  some- 
t.liing  divine,  in  the  satisfaction  not  seldom  afforded  in  extraordinai-y  times  even  to 
individual  longings."  We  agree  with  this  great  teacher  in  thinking  that  this  account 
lame  indirectly  from  the  shepherds  themselves,  as  it  recites  so  pai'ticularly  what  occurred 
tj)  themselves  personally,  and  makes  so  little  mention  of  vvhat  happened  to  the  child  after 
their  arrival.  The  facts  may  be  supposed  to  have  been  as  follows:  The  faithful  were 
jinxious  to  preserve  the  minute  features  of  the  life  of  Jesus.  (We  cannot  be  persuaded 
by  the  assertions  of  modern  Idealism  that  this  feeling  had  no  existence.  We  see  every 
day  how  anxiously  men  look  for  individual  traits  in  the  childhood  of  .gi'eat  men.)  Especial- 
ly would  any  ono  who  had  the  opportunity  prosecute  such  researches  in  the  remarkable 
jilace  where  Christ  was  boni.  Perhaps  one  of  these  inquirers  there  found  one  of  the  slieii- 
lierds  who  had  witnessed  these  events,  and  whose  memory  of  them  was  vividly  recalled 
lUter  his  conversion  to  Christianity.  We  cannot  be  sure  that  such  a  man  would  give  with 
litcraJ  accuracy  the  words  that  he  had  heard  ;  bnt,  taking  them  as  they  stand,  it  is  astonisli- 
iiig  how  free  they  are  from  the  materialism  which  always  tinged  Jewish  expression,  and 
in  how  purely  spiritual  a  way  th(!y  describe  the  sublime  transaction  of  which  they  treat. 
Whether  wc  follow  the  received  version  or  that  of  the  Cod.  Alex.,  wc  litid  the  same 
thought  expressed  in  the  statement  of  the  shoplierds,  viz.,  that  "God  is  glorified  iirtbe 
Messiah,  who  brings  peace  and  joy  to  the  uartli,  and  restores  man  agaiu  to  the  Divine 
favour."' 


THE  SACRIFICE  OF  PURIFICATION.  23 

§  17.  The  Sacrifice  of  Purification,  and  tJic  Ransom  of  the  First-horn  ; 
their  Weight  as  Proof  against  the  Mythical  Theory. 

Tlie  mass  of  the  Jewish  people,  whose  minds  were  darkened  by 
their  material  and  political  views,  entertained  a  totally  false  idea  of  the 
Messiah ;  but  there  were  many  at  Jerusalem  who  longed  for  a  purer 
salvation,  and  these,  also,  were  to  receive  a  sign  that  the  object  of  their 
hopes  had  at  last  appeared. 

Forty  days  after  the  birth  of  the  infant  Jesus  his  parents  carried 
him  to  the  temple  at  Jerusalem,  in  order  to  offer,  according  to  their 
means,  the  prescribed  sacrifice  for  the  purification  of  Mary,  and  to  pay 
the  usual  ransom  for  their  first-borii,*  This  appears  sti-ange,  in  view 
of  the  extraordinary  circumstances  that  preceded  and  followed  the 
birth  of  the  child,  which,  one  might  supjiose,  would  make  it  an  excep- 
tion to  ordinary  rules.  The  points  which  the  Levitical  law  had  in  view' 
seem  not  to  have  existed  here :  so  remarkable  a  birth  might  have  pre- 
cluded the  necessity  of  the  Levitical  purification.  The  ransom  which 
had  to  be  paid  for  other  first-born  sons,  in  view  of  their  original  obli- 
gation to  the  priesthood,  could  hardly  be  necessary  in  the  case  of  an 
infant  who  was  one  day  to  occupy  the  summit  of  the  Theocracy.  It 
would  be  natural  to  suppose  that  Mary  must  have  hesitated,  and  laid 
her  scruples  before  the  priests  for  decision  before  she  could  make  up 
her  mind  to  perform  these  ceremonies.  But  we  cannot  judge  of  such 
extraordinary  events  by  common  standai'ds.  Mary  did  not  venture  to 
speak  freely  in  public  of  these  wonderful  things,  or  to  anticipate  the 
Divine  purposes  in  any  way;  she  left  it  to  God  to  educate  the  child, 
which  had  been  announced  to  her  as  the  Messiah,  so  as  to  fit  him  for 
his  calling,  and,  at  the  proper  time,  to  authenticate  his  mission  publicly 
and  conspicuously. 

Now  a  mythus  generally  endeavors  to  ennoble  its  subject,  and  to 
adapt  the  story  to  the  idea.t  If,  then,  the  Gospel  narrative  were  myth- 
ical, would  it  have  invented,  or  even  suffered  to  remain,  a  circumstance 
so  foreign  to  the  idea  of  the  myth,  and  so  little  calculated  to  dignify  it 
as  the  above  1  A  mythns  would  have  introduced  an  angel,  or,  at  least, 
a  vision,  to  hinder  Mary  fi-om  submitting  the  child  to  a  ceremony  so  un- 
worthy of  its  dignity  ;   or  the  priests  would  have  received  an  intimation 

*  Exod.,  xiii.,  2,  12 ;  Num.,  iii.,  45  ;  xviii.,  15  ;  Levit,  xii.,  2. 

t  The  remarks  of  Strauss,  1.  c,  p.  326,  do  not  at  all  weaken  what  is  here  said.  He  ad- 
duces, also,  the  fact  that  Luke  (iii.,  21)  states  the  baptism  without  mentioning  John's  pre- 
vious refusal  (Matt.,  iii.,  14) ;  but  all  the  force  of  this  lies  in  his  presupposition  that  Luke's 
narrative  is  also  mj'thical,  which  I  deny.  As  to  Gal.,  iv.,  4,  we  of  course  believe  that 
Christ  strictly  fulfilled  the  Mosaic  law  ;  but  this  fact,  on  Jewish  principles,  is  no  parallel  to 
tlie  other,  viz.,  that  Mary,  under  the  circumstances  of  tlie  miraculous  birth,  needed  purifica- 
tion, and  that  the  Messiah,  who  was  destined  for  the  highest  station  in  the  Theocracy, 
needed  a  ransom  from  the  obligation  to  the  priesthood. 


24  THE  CHILDHOOD  OF  CHRIST. 

from  heaven  to  bow  before  the  infant,  and  prevent  its  being  thus  re- 
duced to  the  level  of  ordinary  children.  Nothing  of  all  this  took  place ; 
but,  instead  of  it,  simply  and  unostentatiously,  the  high  dignity  and 
destiny  of  the  child  were  revealed  to  two  faithful  souls. 

^18.   Simcon^s  Prophetic  Discourse. 

The  aged  and  devout  Simeon,*  who  had  longed  and  prayed  for  the 
coming  of  Messiah's  kingdom,  had  received  the  Divine  assurance  that 
he  should  not  die  without  seeing  the  desire  of  his  heart.  Under  a  pe- 
culiarly vivid  impulse  of  this  presentiment,  he  entered  the  Temple 
just  as  the  infant  Jesus  was  brought  in.  The  Divine  glory  irradiating 
the  child's  features  harmonized  with  the  longing  of  his  inspired  soul ; 
he  recognized  the  manifested  Messiah,  took  the  infant  in  his  arms,  and 
exclaimed,  in  a  burst  of  inspired  gratitude,  "  Lord,  now  let  thy  servant 
depart  in  peace  according  to  thy  promise,  for  mine  eyes  have  seen  thy  sal- 
vation which  thou  hast  prepared  before  the  face  of  all  people,  a  light  to 
enlighten  the  Gentiles,  and  the  glory  of  thy  people  Israelii  Then,  turn- 
ing to  Mary,  he  exclaimed,  ''Behold,  this  child  is  set  for  the  fall  and 
rising  again  of  many  in  Israel,  and  for  a  sign  ivhich  shall  he  spohcn 
against  ;\  and  a  sword  shall  pierce  through  thine  own  soul  also,  that  the 
thoughts  of  many  hearts  may  be  revealed^ 

Notice,  now,  the  remarkable  idea  of  the  Messiah  which  these  words 
convey ;  precisely  such  a  one  as  we  should  expect  from  a  longing 
Jew,  of  deep,  spiritual  piety.  Although  it  cannot  be  said  to  contain 
really  Christian  elements,  it  is  far  above  the  ordinary  conceptions  of 
the  times ;  and  this  not  only  confirms  the  truth  of  the  narrative,  but 
stamps  the  discourse  as  Simeon's  own,  and  not  a  speech  composed  in 
his  name.§  It  is  true,  Simeon  conceives  the  kingdom  of  Messiah  as 
tending  to  glorify  the  Jewish  people,  but  yet  extends  its  blessings  also 
over  the  heathen,  and  believes  that  the  light  of  the  knowledge  of  God 

*  We  have  no  reason  to  suppose  him  to  bo  the  Rabbi  Simeon,  the  father  of  Gamaliel,  as 
no  distinguishing  mark  of  eminence  is  assigned  to  him. 

t  It  is  said  in  Luke,  ii.,  33,  that  "Joseph  and  Mary  marvelled"  at  the  words  of  Simeon. 
Now  it  is  strange  that  what  he  said  should  appear  marvellous  to  the  patents,  who  were 
already  cognizant  of  so  many  wonderful  events  in  the  history  of  the  child.  But  we  are  to 
rememhcr  that  the  first  three  Gospels  do  not  contain  connected  histories,  but  compilations 
of  separate  memoirs ;  and,  again,  the  writer  of  the  narrative  may  have  been  so  imbued  with 
wonder  at  the  extraordinary  whole,  as  to  transfer  this  feeling  to  his  expression  in  detailing 
the  separate  parts,  again  and  again.  The  narrative  would  have  worn  a  very  difl'erent  as- 
pect had  Luke  designed  to  compose  a  systematic  work,  with  the  parts  accurately  adjust- 
ed, Instead  of  writing,  as  he  did,  with  simple  and  straightforward  candour. 

t  The  results  of  Messiah's  appearance  among  men  depend  upon  their  own  spiritual  dis- 
positions :  salvation  for  the  believer,  destnittion  for  the  unbeliever.  Around  his  banner 
tlie  hosts  of  the  faithful  gather;  but  infidels  reject  and  fight  against  it.  Salvation  and 
doom  are  correlative  ideas  ;  nil  world-historical  epochs  are  epochs  of  condemnation. 

$  The  accurate  report  of  this  discourse  is  accounted  for  by  the  supposition  that  the  ac- 
count came  indirectly  from  Anna:  not  only  the  discourse,  but  the  whole  occurrence,  must 
have  made  a  deep  impression  upon  her  mind. 


THE  STAR  OF  THE  WISE  MEN.  25 

will  illumine  them  also.  Nor  does  he  conceive  Messiali's  kingdom  as 
triumphing  at  once  by  displays  of  miraculous  power,  but  rather  as  de- 
veloping itself  after  struggles  vv^ith  prevailing  corruptions,  and  after  a 
gradual  purifying  of  the  theocratic  nation.  The  conflict  with  the  cor- 
rupt part  of  the  nation  was  to  be  severe  before  the  Messiah  could  lead 
his  faithful  ones  to  victory.  The  foreboding  of  suffering  to  Mary,  so 
indefinitely  expressed,  bears  no  mds\i  o^  post  factum  invention.  But 
the  inspired  idea  of  Messiah  in  the  pious  old  man  obviously  connected 
the  sufferings  which  he  was  to  endure  in  his  strife  against  the  conupt 
people  with  those  which  were  foretold  of  him  in  Isaiah,  liii. 

The  other  devout  one,  to  whom  the  destiny  of  the  infant  Jesus  was 
revealed,  was  the  aged  Anna,  who  heard  Simeon's  words,  shared  in 
his  joyful  anticipations,  and  united  in  his  song  of  thanksgiving.* 

§   19.    The  Longing  of  the  Heathen  for  a  Saviour. —  The  Star  of  the 

Wise  Men. 
Not  only  dwellers  about  Bethlehem,  but  also  men  from  a  far-distant 
land,  imbued  with  the  longing  desires  of  which  we  have  spoken,  were 
led  to  the  place  where  Christ  was  born  by  a  sign  suited  to  their  pe- 
culiar mode  of  life,  a  fact  which  foreshadowed  that  the  hopes  of  hea- 
then as  well  as  Jews,  unconscious  as  well  as  conscious  longings  for  a 
Saviour,  were  afterward  to  be  gratified.t  We  have  before  remarked, 
that  the  natural  developement  of  the  heathen  mind  worked  in  the  same 
direction  as  the  movement  oi  revealed  religion  among  the  Jews  to  pre- 
pare the  way  for  Christ's  appearance,  which  was  the  aim  and  end  of 
all  previous  human  history.  There  is  something  analogous  to  the  law 
and  the  prophets  (which,  under  revealed  religion,  led  directly,  and  by 
an  organically  arranged  connexion,  to  Christ),  in  the  sporadic  and 
detached  revelations,  which,  here  and  there  among  the  heathen, 
arose  from  the  Divine  consciousness  implanted  in  humanity.  As, 
under  the  Law,  man's  sense  of  its  insufficiency  to  work  out  his  justifi- 
cation was  accompanied  by  the  promise  of  One  who  should  accomplish 
what  the  Law  could  never  do,  so,  in  the  progress  of  the  pagan  mind 
under  the  law  of  nature,  there  arose  a  sense  of  the  necessity  of  a  new 
revelation  from  heaven,  and  a  longing  desire  for  a  higher  order  of 

*  We  agree  with  Scldeierviacher  in  thinking  it  probable  that  the  narrative  came  indi- 
rectly from  Anna.  She  is  far  more  minutely  described  in  it  than  Simeon,  although  the 
latter  and  his  discourse  constitute  the  most  important  part  of  the  account,  while  her  words 
are  not  reported  at  all. 

t  If  this  naiTative  is  to  be  considered  as  mt/lhical,  we  must  yet  ascribe  its  origin  to  the 
same  source  which  produced  the  Hebrew  Gospel,  viz.,  the  Jewish-Christian  congregations 
in  Palestine — a  likely  origin,  indeed,  for  a  myth  ascribing  so  great  interest  and  importance 
to  uncircumcised  heathen !  An  extravagant  exaggeration  of  the  real  occurrence  was  sub- 
sequently made,  probably  from  a  fragment  of  one  of  the  recensions  of  the  Hebrew  Gospel 
(Ignat.,  Epist.  ad  Ephes.,  $  19) :  "The  star  sparkled  briUiantly  beyond  all  other  stars  -.  it 
was  a  strange  and  wonderful  sight.  The  other  stars,  with  the  sun  and  moon,  formed  a  choir 
around  it,  but  its  blaze  outshone  them  all." 


26  THE  CHILDHOOD  OF  CHRIST. 

things.  The  notion  of  a  Messiah,  carried  about  by  the  Jews  in  their 
intercourse  with  different  nations,  every  where  found  a  point  of  contact 
with  the  religious  sense  of  men  ;  and  thus  natural  and  revealed  religion 
worked  into  each  other,  as  well  as  separately,  in  preparing  the  way 
for  the  appearance  of  Christ.* 

Thus  it  happened  that  a  few  sages  in  Arabia  (or  in  some  part  of 
the  Parthian  kingdom),  who  inquired  for  the  course  of  human  events 
in  that  of  the  stars,  became  convinced  that  a  certain  constellation  or 
start  which  they  beheld  was  a  tokenf  of  the  birth  of  the  great  King 
who  was  expected  to  arise  in  the  East.  It  is  not  necessary  to  suppose 
that  an  actual  miracle  was  wrought  in  this  case ;  the  course  of  natural 
events,  under  Divine  guidance,  was  made  to  lead  to  Christ,  just  as  the 
general  moral  cultui-e  of  the  heathen,  though  under  natural  forms,  was 
made  to  lead  to  the  knowledge  of  the  Saviour. 

The  Magi  studied  astrology,  and  in  their  study  found  a  sign  of 
Christ.  If  it  offends  us  to  find  that  God  has  used  the  errors  of  man  to 
lead  him  to  a  knowledge  of  the  great  truths  of  salvation,  as  if  thereby  He 
had  lent  himself  to  sustain  the  False,  then  must  we  break  in  pieces  the 
chain  of  human  events,  in  which  the  True  and  the  False,  the  Good  and 
the  Evil,  are  so  inseparably  linked,  that  the  latter  often  serves  for  the 
point  of  ti'ansition  to  the  former.  Especially  do  we  see  this  in  the 
history  of  the  spread  of  Christianity,  where  superstition  often  paves 
the  way  for  faith.  God  condescends  to  the  platforms  of  men  in  train- 
ing them  for  belief  in  the  Redeemer,  and  meets  the  aspirations  of  the 
truth-seeking  soul  even  in  its  error  !§  In  the  case  of  the  wise  men,  a 
real  truth,  perhajjs,  lay  at  the  bottom  of  the  error ;  the  truth,  namely, 
that  the  greatest  of  all  events,  which  was  to  produce  the  greatest  rev- 
olution in  humanity,  is  actually  connected  with  the  epochs  of  tlie  mate- 

*  We  do  not  insist  upon  Tacit.,  Hist,  5,  13,  and  Siieio/i.,  Vespasian,  4,  who  speak  of  a 
niraour  spread  over  the  whole  East,  of  the  approacliing  appearance  of  the  great  King,  as  it 
is  yet  doubtful  whether  these  passages  are  not  imitated  from  Josephus. 

t  It  is  necessary  to  distinguish  wliat  is  objectively  real  in  the  narrative  from  what  arises 
from  the  subjective  stand-point  of  the  author  of  our  Matthew's  Gospel,  who  certainly  did 
not  receive  the  account  from  au  eye-witness.  Not  merely  philological  exegesis,  but  also 
liistorical  criticism,  are  recjuired  for  this  ;  and  if  the  result  of  such  an  in(iuiry  be  pronounced 
arbitran,',  because  it  does  not  either  affinn  or  reject  the  objective  reality  of  everj/  thing  in 
the  account,  then  must  all  iiistorical  criticism  be  pronounced  arbitrary  also,  for  it  has  no 
other  mode  of  pi'ocedure  in  testing  the  accuracy  of  a  nairatlve. 

X  Conf  Bishop  Munler's  treatise  on  the  "Star  of  the  Wise  Men,"  and  Iihicr's  Chronol- 
ogy, ii.,  399.  It  is  immaterial  whether  the  sages  were  led  to  seek  for  the  sig'n  by  a  theory 
of  their  own,  or  by  a  traditional  one. 

$  Hnmann  strikingly  says,  "  How  often  has  God  condescended,  not  merely  to  the  feel- 
ings and  thoughts  of  men,  but  even  to  their  failings  and  their  prejudices!  But  this  very 
condescension  iauc  of  the  highest  marks  of  his  love  to  man),  which  is  exhibited  every 
•where  in  the  Bible,  affords  subjects  of  derision  to  those  weaklings  who  look  into  the  word 
of  God  for  displays  of  human  wisdom,  for  the  gratification  of  their  pert  luid  idle  curiosity,  or 
for  the  spirit  of  their  own  times  or  their  own  sect." — HWA;.«,  i.,  5S. 


THE  MASSACRE  OF  THE  INNOCENTS.  27 

rial  universe,  although  the  links  of  the  chain  may  be  hidden  from  our 
view. 

In  the  narrative  before  us,  we  need  not  attach  the  same  indisputable 
certainty  to  the  details  as  to  the  general  substance.  That  the  Magians 
should  be  led,  by  their  astrological  researches,  to  a  presentiment  of  the 
birth  of  the  Saviour  in  Judea — that  their  own  longings  should  impel 
them  to  journey  to  Jerusalem  and  do  homage  to  the  infant  in  whom 
lay  veiled  the  mighty  King — tlds  is  the  lofty,  the  Divine  element  in 
the  transaction,  which  no  one  who  believes  in  a  guiding,  eternal  love 
— no  one  who  is  conscious  of  the  real  import  of  a  Redeemer — can 
fail  to  recognize. 

We  cannot  vouch  with  equal  positiveness  for  the  accuracy  of  Mat- 
thew's statement  of  the  means  by  which  the  sagos  learned,  after  their 
aiTival  in  Jerusalem,  that  the  chosen  child  was  to  be  born  in  Beth- 
lehem ;  but  it  matters  little  whether  they  were  directed  thither  by 
Herod,  or  in  some  other  way.  At  any  rate,  in  so  small  a  place  as 
Bethlehem,  they  might  easily  have  been  guided  to  the  exact  place  by 
providential  means  not  out  of  the  common  way  ;  for  instance,  by  meet- 
ing with  some  of  the  shepherds,  or  other  devout  persons,  who  had 
taken  part  in  the  great  event ;  and  they,  perhaps,  described  the  whole 
as  it  appeared  to  them  subjectively,  when,  after  reaching  the  abode, 
fhey  looked  up  at  the  starry  heavens. 

§  20.    The  Massacre  of  the  Innocents  and  the  Flight  into  Egypt. 

The  account  of  the  massacre  of  the  infants  at  Bethlehem  cannot 
appear  incredible  when  we  consider  the  character  of  the  man  to  whom 
this  act  of  blind  and  senseless  cruelty,  worthy  of  an  insane  tyrant,  is 
ascribed. 

It  was  that  Herod,  whose  crimes,  committed  in  violation  of  every 
natural  feeling,  ever  urged  him  on  to  new  deeds  of  cruelty ;  whose 
path  to  the  throne,  and  whose  throne  itself,  were  stained  with  human 
blood ;  whose  vengeance  against  conspirators,  not  satiated  with  their 
own  destruction,  demanded  that  of  their  whole  families  ;*  whose  rage 
was  hot,  up  to  the  very  hour  of  his  death,  against  his  nearest  kindred  ; 
whose  wife,  Mariamne,  and  three  sons,  Alexander,  Aristobulus,  and 
Antipater,  fell  victims  to  his  suspicions,- the  last. just  before  his  death; 
who,  in  a  word,  certainly  deserved  that  the  Emperor  Augustus  should 
have  said  of  him,  "  IJc?-odis  mallem  porcus  esse,  quam  Ji.lius.'"\  It  was 
that  Herod,  who,  at  the  close  of  a  blood-stained  life  of  seventy  years, 
goaded  by  the  furies  of  an  evil  conscience,  racked  by  a  painful  and 
incurable  disease,  waiting  for  death,  but  desiring  life,  raging  against 

*  Joseph.,  Archreol.,  xv.,  viii.,  §  4. 

t  These  words  were  appUed,  in  the  fifth  century,  by  an  anachronism  of  the  pagan  writer 
Macrobius,  to  the  massacre  of  the  infants  at  Bethlehem. — Saturnal.,  ii.,  4. 


23  THE  CHILDHOOD  OF  CHRIST. 

God  and  man,  and  maddened  by  the  thought  that  the  Jews,  instead 
of  bewailing  his  death,  would  rejoice  over  it  as  the  greatest  of  bless- 
ino-s,  commanded  the  worthies  of  the  nation  to  be  assembled  in  the 
circus,  and  issued  a  secret  order*  that,  after  his  death,  they  should  all 
be  slain  together,  so  that  their  kindred,  at  least,  might  have  cause  to 
weep  for  his  death  !t  Can  we  deem  the  crime  of  sacrificing  a  few 
children  to  Lis  rage  and  blind  suspicion  too  atrocious  for  such  a 
monster  1 

As  we  have  no  reason  to  question  the  narrative  of  the  tyrant's 
attempts  upon  the  life  of  the  wonderful  child  whose  birth  had  come  to 
his  ears,  we  can  readily  connect  therewith  the  flight  into  Egypt.  On 
the  supposition  that  this  flight  actually  took  place,  it  was  natural 
enough,  especially  with  a  view  to  obviate  any  objections  which  the 
issuing  of  the  Messiah  from  a  profane  land  might  suggest  to  Jewish 
minds,  for  men  to  seek  analogies  between  this  occurrence  and  the 
history  of  Moses  and  the  theocratic  people ;  while,  on  the  other  hand, 
it  would  be  absurd  to  suppose  that  a  legend  of  the  flight,  without  any 
historical  basis,  should  have  had  its  origin  solely  in  the  desire  to  find 
such  analogies. 

Thus,  in  the  very  beginning  of  the  life  of  Him  who  was  to  save  the 
world,  we  see  a  foreshadowing  of  what  it  was  afterward  to  be.  The 
believing  souls,  to  whom  the  lofty  import  of  that  life  was  shown  by 
Divine  signs,  saw  in  it  the  fulfilment  of  their  longings  ;  the  power  of 
the  world,  ever  subservient  to  evil,  raged  against  it,  but,  amid  all 
dangers,  the  hand  of  God  guided  and  brought  it  forth  victorious.| 

§  21.   The  Return  to  Nazareth. 
Joseph  and  Mary  remained  but  a  short  time  with  the  child  in  Egypt. 
The  death  of  Ilerod  soon  recalled  them  to  Palestine,  and  they  returned 
to  their  old  place  of  abode,  the  little  town  of  Nazareth,§  in  Galilee. 

*  It  was  never  executed. 

t  Josephus  (Archasol.,  xvii.,  6,  5)  says  of  him  :  "  MtXaira  xo^h  avr'av  Jipa  i-ji  naatv  ila}  pia- 
liovaa."  Even  Scliloai^cr  admits  (View  of  Ancient  History  and  Civilization,  iii.,  1,  p.  261 
that  the  account  of  the  massacre  of  the  infants,  viewed  in  this  connexion,  oft'ers  no  im 
probability. 

t  Instead  of  seeing  the  expression  of  the  idea  in  the  facts,  we  midit,  with  the  idealistic 
ghost-seers,  invert  the  order  of  things,  and  say  that  "  the  idea  wrought  itself  into  histoi-y  in 
the  popular  traditions"  (whose  origin,  bythe-way,  it  would  be  hard  to  explain  after  what 
lias  been  said)  "  of  the  Christians."  In  that  case  we  must  consider  every  thing  remarkable, 
every  scintillation  of  Divinity  in  the  lives  of  individual  men,  as  absolutely  fabulous.  This 
were,  indeed,  to  deL'ra<lo  and  a/hrizc  all  liLstory  and  all  life  ;  and  such  is  the  necessary 
tendency  of  that  criticism  which  rejects  all  imnicdiato  Divine  influence. 

$  It  was  formerly  thought  that  Matthew  and  Luke  contradicted  eadi  other  here.  Luke 
states  that  Nazareth  was  the  home  of  Joseph  and  Mary,  and  that,  having  gone  to  Bethle- 
hem for  a  special  purpose  (the  taxing),  they  remained  long  enough  to  perform  the  necessary 


BROTHERS  AND  SISTERS  OF  JESCS.  29 

§  22.  Uroiliers  and  Sisleis  of  Jesus  ;   llie  Mention  of  them  in  tlie  Gospel 
Narrative,  Proof  of  its  historical  Character. 

Various  scattered  statements  in  the  Evangelists  lead  iis  to  conclude 
that  Christ  had  younger  brothers  and  sisters.*  The  religious  princi- 
j'>les  of  Joseph  and  Mary  offered  no  hindrance  to  this ;  it  harmonizes 
well  with  the  Christian  view  of  the  sanctity  of  wedlock  ;  nor  is  there 
any  thing  at  variance  with  it  in  the  authentic  traditions  of  the  apostol- 
ic age. 

But  had  the  miraculous  conception  been  mythical,  the  idea  of  later- 
born  children  would  have  been  abhorrent  to  the  spirit  which  originated 
such  a  myth.  In  later  times,  indeed,  this  idea  did,  appear  abhoiTent 
to  some  minds  ;  but  it  Still  remains  a  mystery  why  the  mythical  spirit 
did  not  exercise  its  power  in  remodelling  the  historical  elements. 

It  is  worthy  of  note  that  Mark  and  John  agree  in  stating  that  these 
brothers  of  the  Saviour  remained  unbelievers  during  his  stay  on  earth, 
a  fact  which  illustrates  the  truthfulness  of  the  history,  since  it  by  no 
means  tended  to  glorify  either  Christ  or  his  brothers,  one  of  whom,  at 
least  (James),  was  in  high  repute  among  the  Jewish  Christians.  It  is 
not  to  be  wondered  at  that  the  prophet  was  without  honour  among  those 
who  dwelt  under  the  same  roof,  and  saw  him  grow  up  under  the  same 
laws  of  ordinary  human  nature  with  themselves.  True,  this  daily  con- 
ceremonies  after  the  birth  of  the  child,  and  then  returned  home.  According  to  Matthe\v, 
Beihlchcm  appears  to  have  been  their  settled  place  of  abode,  and  they  were  only  induced, 
by  special  considerations,  to  betake  themselves  to  Nazareth  after  their  retuni  from  Egypt. 
The  apparent  contradiction  vanishes  when  wc  consider  that  the  memoirs  were  collected 
and  written  independently  of  each  other. 

Luke  may  have  received  the  account  of  the  journey  of  Christ's  parents  to  Bethlehem, 
without  learning  either  their  intention  to  remain  there  with  the  child,  or  the  cause  that  led 
them  to  change  that  intention ;  vchile  the  author  of  the  Greek  text  of  Matthew  may  have 
adhered  to  the  separate  statements  that  were  given  to  him,  in  ignorance  of  the  special 
cause  of  the  journey  to  Bethlehem.  Both  accounts  may  be  equally  true,  and  harmonize 
well  with  each  other,  although  those  who  put  them  imperfectly  together  may  not  perceive 
the  argument.  Moreover,  even  in  Matthew  (xiii.,  54)  we  find  Nazareth  named  as  Christ's 
"  own  countrj-."  There  is  no  improbability  in  supposing  that  Joseph  and  Mary  were  in- 
duced, by  the  remarkable  events  which  marked  the  birth  of  the  child  at  Bethlehem,  and  by 
the  revelation  of  his  destiny  that  was  vouchsafed  to  them,  to  fix  their  residence  at  the  seat 
of  the  tribe  of  David,  in  the  vicinity  of  the  Holy  City;  but  that  fear  of  Archelans,  who  emu- 
lated his  father's  cruelty  and  contempt  of  holy  things,  led  them  to  change  this  purpose. 
This  much  is  certain,  that  Matthew's  statement  of  the  apprehension  which  grew  out  of 
Archelaus's  accession  to  the  government  agrees  precisely  with  the  testimony  of  history  in 
regard  to  that  prince,  who,  in  the  tenth  year  of  his  reign,  was  accused  before  Augustus  of 
various  crimes,  and  exiled  to  Vienna.— Joseph.,  xvii.,  xiii.,  2. 

*  The  word  tws,  in  Matt.,  i.,  25,  in  connexion  with  the  statement  that  Jesus  was  Mnry's 
first-born,  leads  as  to  infer  Matthew's  knowledge  of  children  subsequently  born  to  her  (conf. 
De  Wette  on  the  passage),  which  we  the  more  certainly  conclude,  as  the  same  Evangelist 
mentions  brothers  and  sisters  of  Jesus  especially,  together  with  his  mother. — See  Matt., 
xiii,  55.  This  view  is  the  most  natural  in  such  passages  as  name  them  together,  e.  g., 
Luke,  viii.,  21  ;  Mark,  iii.,  31  ;  John,  ii.,  12  ;  vii.,  3.  It  would  be  forced  work  indeed  to  sup- 
pose that  in  all  these  passages  iit\<poi  is  placed  for  dittpioi. 


30  THE  CHILDHOOD  OF  CHRIST. 

tact  afforded  them  many  opportunities  of  beholding  the  Divinity  that 
streamed  through  the  veil  of  his  flesh,  yet  it  required  a  spiritual  mind 
and  a  lively  faith  to  recognize  the  revealed  Son  of  God  in  the  lowly 
garb  of  humanity.  The  impression  of  humanity  made  upon  their 
senses  day  after  day,  and  thus  grown  into  a  habit,  could  not  be  made  to 
yield  to  the  Divine  manifestations,  unless  in  longer  time  than  was  re- 
quired for  others  ;  but  when  it  did  yield,  and,  after  such  long-continued 
opposition,  they  acknowledged  their  brother  as  the  Son  of  God  and  the 
Messiah,  they  only  became  thereby  the  more  trustworthy  witnesses. 

§  23.   Consciousness  of  Messiahshlp  in  the  Mind  of  Jesus. — Jesus  among 

the  Doctors. 

The  exti-aordinary  circumstances  of  the  birth  of  Christ  not  only 
served  as  portents  of  the  greatest  event  in  the  world's  history,  but  also, 
perhaps,  furnished  external  occasions  for  the  developement,  in  the  mind 
of  Jesus,  of  the  consciousness  of  his  Messiahship.  True,  this  develope- 
ment, far  from  admitting  of  mechanical  illustrations,  required,  above 
all,  an  inward  light  in  the  depths  of  the  higher  self-consciousness,  the 
internal  testimony  of  the  Spirit ;  but  such  a  testimony  by  no  means 
precludes  the  agency  of  external  impressions,  acting  as  suggestive  oc- 
casions. The  inward  Divine  light  and  the  revelation  from  outward 
events  touch  upon  each  other ;  and  this  connexion  between  the  inter- 
nal and  the  external  belongs  to  the  essence  of  purely  human  develope- 
ment.* 

Of  the  early  history  of  Jesus  we  have  only  a  single  incident ;  but 
that  incident  strikingly  illustrates  the  manner  in  which  the  conscious- 
ness of  his  Divine  nature  developed  itself  in  the  mind  of  the  child. 
Jesus  had  attained  his  twelfth  year,  a  period  which  was  regarded 
among  the  Jews  as  the  dividing  line  between  childhood  and  youth, 
and  at  which  regular  religious  instruction  and  the  study  of  the  Law 
were  generally  entei'ed  upon.  For  that  reason,  his  parents,  who  were 
accustoraedf  to  visit  Jerusalem  together|  annually  at  the  time  of  the 
Passover,  took  him  with  them  then  for  the  first  time.  When  the  feast 
was  over,  and  they  were  setting  out  on  their  return,  they  missed  their 
son  ;  this,  however,  does  not  seem  to  have  alarmed  them,  and  perhaps 
he  ^vas  accustomed  to  remain  with  certain  kindred  families  or  friends  ; 
indeed,  we  arc  told  (Luke,  ii.,  41)  that  they  expected  to  find  him  "in 

•  Weisae  maint.ains  (I  cannot  see  on  wliat  grounds)  tliat  this  view  tlcgraJes  tlie  Divine 
element  in  tiie  inner  calling  of  Cln-ist  to  a  mechanical  result  of  circumstances,  p.  261. 

t  Luke  (ii.,  42)  says,  "  lltnl  they  vcitt  to  Jerusalem  every  year  at  flic  feast  of  the  Pass- 
over." This  may  mean  either  that  Joseph  attended  yearly  no  other  feast  but  this,  which 
would  imply  that  it  was  not  the  general  custom  in  Galileo  to  attend  the  three  chief  feasts 
at  Jerusalem,  or  that  Mary  used  to  accompany  bim  to  this  feast  only.  In  either  case,  it 
proves  the  jieculiar  eminence  of  the  Passover. 

t  Mary  accompanied  her  husband,  although  the  Jewish  law  did  not  demand  it. 


CHRIST  AMONG  THE  DOCTORS.  31 

the  company,"  at  the  evening  halt  of  the  caravan.  Disappointed  in 
this  expectation,  they  returned  the  next  morning  to  Jerusalem,  and  on 
the  following  day  found  him  in  the  synagogue  of  the  Temple  among 
the  priests,  who  had  been  led  by  his  questions  into  a  conversation  on 
points  of  faith.*  His  parents  reproached  him  for  the  uneasiness  he 
had  caused  them,  and  he  replied,  "  JVk)/  did  you  seek  me .?  Did  you 
not  know  that  I  must  be  about  my  Father's  business  .?"  Now  these 
words  of  Jesus  contain  no  explanation,  beyond  his  tender  years,t  of 
the  relations  which  he  sustained  to  the  Father ;  they  manifest  simply 
the  consciousness  of  a  child,  a  depth,  to  be  sure,  but  yet  only  a  depth 
of  presentiment. 

"We  can  draw  various  important  inferences  from  this  incident  in  the 
early  life  "of  Christ.  At  a  tender  age  he  studied  the  Old  Testament, 
and  obtained  a  better  knowledge  of  its  religious  value  by  the  light  that 
was  within  him  than  any  human  instruction  could  have  imparted.  Nor 
was  this  beaming  forth  of  an  immediate  consciousness  of  Divine  things 
in  tlie  mind  of  the  child,  in  advance  of  the  developement  of  his  powers 
of  discixrsive  reason,  at  all  alien  to  the  character  and  progress  of  hu- 
man nature,  but  entirely  in  harmony  with  it.  Nor  need  we  wonder 
that  the  infinite  riches  of  the  hidden  spiritual  life  of  the  child  first 
manifested  themselves  to  his  consciousness,  as  if  suggested  by  his  con- 
versation v/ith  the  doctors,  and  that  his  direct  intuitions  of  Divine  truth, 
the  flashes  of  sj^ii'itual  light  that  emanated  from  him,  amazed  the  mas- 
ters in  Israel.  It  not  unfrequently  happens,  in  our  human  life,  that 
the  questions  of  others  are  thus  suggestive  to  great  minds,  and,  like  steel 
upon  the  flint,  draw  forth  their  inner  light,  at  the  same  time  revealing 
to  their  own  souls  the  unknown  treasures  that  lay  in  their  hidden 
depths.  But  they  give  more  than  they  receive  ;  the  outward  suggestion 
only  excites  to  action  their  creative  energy ;  and  men  of  reflective  and 
receptive,  rather  than  creative  minds,  by  inciting  the  latter  to  know  and 
develop  their  vast  resources,  may  not  only  leain  much  from  their  ut- 
terance, but  also  diffuse  the  streams  which  gush  with  overflowing  ful- 
ness fi'om  these  abundant  well-springs.  And  these  remarks  applying 
— in  a  sense  in  which  they  apply  to  no  other — to  that  mind,  lofty  be- 
yond all  human  comparison,  whose  creative  thoughts  are  to  fertilize 

*  How  little  of  the  mythical  there  is  in  this  may  be  seen  from  the  case  of  Josephns,  who 
states  of  himself,  that  when  he  was  fourteen  years  old  the  priests  of  the  city  met  with  him 
to  put  questions  to  him  about  the  law. 

t  The  addition  of  extravagant  and  fabulous  colouring^s  to  historical  elements  may  be  seen 
in  such  instances  as  the  following  from  Irenasus,  on  the  childhood  of  Jesus,  taken  out  of  an 
apocryphal  Gospel  originating  in  Palestine  :  "  When  the  teacher  told  the  boy  to  pronounce 
Alcph,  he  did  so.  But  when  he  told  him  to  say  Beth,  the  child  replied,  '  Tell  me  the  mean- 
ing of  Aleph,  and  then  I  will  tell  you  v.'hat  Belh  is'  "  (an  allusion  to  the  mystical  import  of 
the  letters,  according  to  the  Kabbala).  There  was  any  number  of  such  apocryphal  Gos- 
pels, as  Irenceus  says. 


32  THE  CHILDHOOD  OF  CHRIST. 

the  spiritual  life  of  man  through  all  ages,  and  whose  creative  power 
sprang  from  its  mysterious  union  with  that  Divine  Word,  which  gave 
birth  to  all  things,  show  us  that  His  consciousness  developed  itself 
gi-adually,  and  in  perfect  accordance  with  the  laws  of  human  life,  from 
that  mysterious  union  which  formed  its  gi'ound. 

And  furtlier — without  in  the  least  attempting  to  do  away  with  the 
peculiar  form  of  the  child's  spiritual  life — we  can  recognize  in  this 
incident  a  dawning  sense  of  his  Divine  mission  in  the  mind  of  Jesus  : 
a  sense,  however,  not  yet  unfolded  in  the  form  in  which  the  corrup- 
tion of  the  world,  objectively  presented,  alone  could  occasion  its  devel- 
opemcnt.  The  child  found  congenial  occupation  in  the  things  of  God: 
in  the  Temple  he  was  at  home.  And,  on  the  other  hand,  we  see  an 
ojjening  consciousness  of  the  peculiar  relation  in  which  he  stood  to  the 
Father  as  the  Son  of  God.  We  delight  to  find  in  the  early  lives  of 
eminent  men  some  glimpses  of  the  future,  some  indications  of  their 
after  greatness ;  so  we  gladly  recognize,  in  the  pregnant  words  of  the 
child,  a  foreshadowing  of  what  is  afterward  so  fully  revealed  to  us  in 
the  discourses  of  the  completely  manifested  Christ,  especially  as  they 
are  given  to  us  in  John's  Gospel. 


BOOK    II. 


THE  MENTAL  CULTURE  OF  JESUS.     HIS  LIEE  TO 
THE  TIME  OF  HIS  PUBLIC  MINISTRY. 


BOOK   II. 

THE  MENTAL  CULTURE  OF  JESUS.     UIS  LIFE  TO  TIE  TIME  OF 
HIS  PUBLIC  MINISTRY. 


CHAPTER  I. 

JESUS  NOT  EDUCATED  IN  THE  THEOLOGICAL  SCHOOLS  OF  THE  JEWS. 

WE  have  already  seen  that  in  the  early  progress  of  the  mind  of 
Christ  every  thing  was  original  and  direct,  and  that  external  oc- 
casions w^ere  needed  only  to  bring  out  his  inward  self- activity.  As  we 
must  suppose  that  his  developement  was  subsequently  continued  in  the 
same  way,  we  come  at  once  to  the  conclusion  that  His  education  for  a 
teacher  was  not  due  to  any  of  the  theological  schools  then  existing  in 
Judea.  But  we  can  reach  this  conclusion  also  by  comparing  the 
peculiar  tendencies  of  those  schools  with  the  aims  of  Christ,  with  his 
mode  of  life  and  instruction,  and  with  the  spirit  which  he  diffused 
around  him. 

§  24.  The  Pharisees. 
In  the  outset,  how  unlike  Christ  was  the  legal  spirit  of  Pharisaism, 
with  its  soul-crushing  statutes,  its  dead  theology  of  the  letter,  and  its  bar- 
ren subtilties  !  Some  few  of  the  sect,  endowed  with  a  more  earnest  reli- 
gious sense,  and  a  more  sincere  love  of  truth  than  their  fellows,  could  not 
resist  the  impression  of  Christ's  Divine  manifestation ;  but  they  came 
to  him  with  a  full  knowledge  of  the  difference  between  his  mode  of 
teaching  and  theirs,  and  not  as  to  a  teacher  sprung  from  among  them- 
selves. They  had  first  to  overcome  their  surprise  at  his  strange  and 
extraordinary  language,  before  they  could  enter  into  closer  connexion 
with  him.  They  had  to  renounce  the  wisdom  of  their  schools,  to  dis- 
claim their  legal  righteousness,  and  to  attach  themselves  to  Christ  with 
the  same  sense  of  deficiency  in  themselves,  and  the  same  desire  for 
what  he  alone  could  impart,  as  all  other  men. 

§  25.    The  Sadducees. 
The  spirit  of  the  Sadducees  presents  a  still  more  rugged  contrast  to 
the  spirit  of  Christ.     Their  schools  agreed  in  nothing  but  denying; 
their  only  bond   of  union  was  opposition  to  the  Pharisees,  against 


36  CULTURE  OF  JESUS. 

whom  they  strove  to  re-establish  the  original  Hebraism,  freed  from  the 
foreign  elements  which  the  Pharisaic  statutes  had  mixed  up  with  it. 
But  an  agreement  in  negation  can  be  only  an  ajiparent  one,  if  the 
negation  rests  upon  an  opposite  positive  principle.  Thus  certain  nega- 
tive doctrines,  that  agree  with  Protestantism  in  rejecting  the  authority 
and  traditions  of  the  Romish  Church,  separate  themselves  further  from 
Protestantism  than  the  Romish  doctrine  itself,  by  the  affirmative  prin- 
ciple on  which  they  rest  their  denial,  and  by  carrying  that  denial  too 
far.  The  single  positive  principle  of  Sadduceeism  was  the  one-sided 
prominence  given  by  them  to  morality,  which  they  separated  from  its 
necessary  inward  union  with  religion.  But  Christ's  combat  with  the 
Pharisees  arose  out  of  the  fullest  interpenetration  of  the  moral  and 
religious  elements.  The  Sadducees  wished  to  cut  off  the  progressive 
developement  of  Hebraism  at  an  arbitrary  point.  They  refused  to 
recognize  the  growing  consciousness  of  God,  which,  derived  ft-om  the 
Mosaic  institute,  formed  a  substantial  feature  of  Judaism,  and  hence 
could  not  comprehend  the  higher  religious  element  from  which,  as  a 
germ,  under  successive  Divine  revelations,  the  spiritual  life  of  Juda- 
ism was  to  be  gradually  developed.*  Rejecting  all  such  growth  as 
foreign  and  false,  they  held  a  subordinate  and  isolated  point  to  be  ab- 
solute and  perpetual  ;  adhering  to  the  letter  rather  than  the  spirit. 
To  the  forced  allegorizing  of  the  Pharisees  in  interpreting  the  Scrip- 
ture, they  opposed  a  slavishly  literal  and  narrow  exegesis.  But  Chi'ist, 
on  the  other  hand,  while  he  rejected  the  Pharisaic  traditions,  received 
into  his  doctrine  all  the  riches  of  Divine  knowledge  which  the  progress- 
ive growth  of  Theism,  up  to  the  time  of  John  the  Baptist,  had  brought 
forth.  His  agreement,  then,  with  the  Sadducees,  consisting,  as  it  did, 
solely  in  opposition  to  Pharisaism,  was  merely  negative  and  apparent. 
Some  have  detected  an  affinity  between  the  moral  teaching  of 
Christ  and  the  Anii- Eud<^7nonism  of  the   Sadducees,   the   principle, 

*  See  below  for  the  way  in  which  Christ  illustrated  this  to  the  Sadducees.  As  to  the 
Canon,  it  cannot  be  actually  proved  that  the  Sadducees  held  it  differently  from  other 
.Tews.  It  is  true,  Josephus  says  (Archaeol.,  xiii.,  x.,  6)  that  they  rejected  everj'  thing  but 
the  Mosaic  law — airrp  ovk  dvayiypanrat  h  ro'ii  Mwuir/uiS  vAfioti.  But  the  Mosaic  law  is  not  here 
opposed  to  the  rest  of  the  Canon,  but  to  oral  traditions  ;  and  the  only  question  was  whether 
the  Mosaic  law  alone,  or  in  connexion  with  oral  tradition,  was  to  be  held  as  authority  for 
religious  usages.  The  remaining  books  of  the  Old  Testament  were  not  in  dispute,  as  no 
religious  usages  at  all  were  derived  from  them.  Still,  it  is  not  unlikely  that  the  Sadducees 
went  so  far,  in  their  opposition  to  Pharisaism,  as  to  reject  all  doctrines  that  could  not  be 
shown  to  have  a  Mosaic  origin,  and  to  consider  the  Pentateuch  as  the  sole,  or,  at  least,  the 
«-hief,  source  of  religious  truth.  As  we  find  such  views  of  the  Canon  among  the  .Tewish- 
Christian  sects  (Cf  tlie  Clementines),  we  may  infer  that  they  previously  existed  among 
the  .Tews.  They  would  hanlly  have  denied  Immortality  and  the  ResuiTcction,  if  they  had 
held  the  Prophets  to  be  law  in  the  same  sense  as  the  Pentateuch ;  although  it  is  possible 
that  they  interpreted  such  passages  of  the  Prophets  in  another  way.  The  general  terras 
in  which  Josephus  speaks  of  the  recognition  of  the  Canon  among  the  Jews  (i.,  c.  Apion,  $ 
8)  do  not  suffice  to  prove  tliat  there  were  no  diflcrences  in  this  respect  in  the  different 
sects. 


THE  ESSENES.  37 

namely,  that  man  must  do  good  for  its  own  sake,  without  the  hope  of 
future  recompense.*  But  here,  again,  Christianity  agrees  with  Saddu- 
ceeism  only  in  what  it  denies,  not  in  what  it  affirms.  The  divhie  life 
of  Christianity  has  no  more  affinity  for  that  selfish  Eudajmonism  which 
seeks  the  good  as  means  to  an  end,  than  for  the  spirit  of  Sadduceeism 
which  denies  the  higher  aims  of  moral  action,  and  makes  it  altogether 
"  of  the  earth,  earthly."  These  opposite  errors  sprang  from  one  com- 
mon source,  namely,  the  debasement  of  the  spiritual  life  into  worldli- 
ness,  and  therefore  Christianity  is  alike  antagonistic  to  them  both, 
whether  seen  in  the  worldly  admission  of  a  future  life  by  the  Pharisees, 
or  in  its  woi'ldly  rejection  by  the  Sadducees.  Yet  in  the  doctrine  of  the 
former,  it  must  be  admitted,  lay  a  germ  of  truth  which  only  needed  to 
be  freed  from  selfish  and  sensual  tendencies  to  show  itself  in  its  full 
spiritual  import.t  ,  , 

§  26.  The  Esscncs. 
The  secrecy  which  the  sect  of  the  Essenes  affected  has  given  rise  to 
many  subtle  and  arbitrary  hypotheses.  Some  have  found  in  its  ardent 
religious  spirit  ground  for  believing  in  a  connexion  between  it  and 
Christianity  .J  This  argument,  by  proving  too  much,  proves  nothing  ; 
on  the  same  principle  we  might  show  a  connexion  between  Christian- 
ity and  every  form  under  which  mysticism  has  appeared  and  reappear- 
ed in  the  history  of  religion.  But  there  were  other  points  of  similarity 
between  Essenism  and  Christianity,  besides  this  mystic  element  which 
has  its  source  in  man's  native  religious  tendencies.  Essenism  grew 
out  of  Judaism,  and  was  pervaded  by  a  moral  belief  in  God,  a  spirit 
which  was  nourished  and  strengthened  by  habits  of  seclusion  from 
the  stir  of  life,  of  religious  communion,  and  of  quiet  prayer  and  medi- 
tation. Other  resemblances  may  be  discovered  between  Essenism  and 
the  doctrine  of  Christ,  or  the  forms  of  the  first  Christian  communities  ; 
but  they  may  be  traced,  like  those  just  mentioned,  to  sources  common 
to  both,  and  therefore  afford  no  proof  of  a  real  connexion  between 

*  No  reliance  is  to  be  placed  in  the  Talmudic  tradition  in  Pirke  Aboth,  i.,  3,  according  to 
which  the  principle  thus  perverted  to  the  denial  of  a  future  life  came  from  Antigonus  Ish 
Socho,  or  Simeon  the  Just.  The  prevalent  orthodoxy  was  always  incHncd  to  ascribe  error 
to  the  perversion  of  some  orthodox  doctrine. 

t  Dr.  von  Colin  arrives  at  the  conclusion  that  "  the  moral  philosophy  of  the  Sadducees 
was  better  than  that  of  the  Pharisees,  because  the  New  Testament  does  not  attack  their 
moral  principles,  but  only  their  denial  of  the  Resurrection." — (Bibl.  Theol.,  i.,  4.'J0.)  We  do 
not  admit  the  inference.  This  silence  of  the  New  Testament  can  be  readily  accounted  for 
on  the  ground  that  Sadduceeism  had  few  points  in  common  with  Christianity;  and  while  it 
was  necessary  to  guard  men  frequently  against  Pharisaic  abuses  of  great  troths  (e.  g.,  of 
the  truth  that  morality  and  religion  are  inseparable),  the  open  contrast  of  Sadduceeism  made 
such  special  controversy  with  its  teachers  unnecessary. 

t  First  alluded  to  in  an  unpublished  treatise  of  J.  G.  Wachter,  De  Primwdiis  Christi- 
art/e  Reli^ionis,  libri  d^io.  Sec,  especially,  Reinhard's  Versuch  iiber  den  Plan  .lesu 
IReinhard's  Plan  of  the  Fo^tnder  of  Christianity/,  translated  by  A.  Kaufman,  Andovcr]. 


38  CULTURE  OF  JESUS. 

them.  A  closer  examination  will  demonstrate  that  the  similarities 
were  only  apparent,  while  the  differences  were  essential. 

For  instance,  the  Essenes  prohibited  oat/ts,  and  so  did  Christ.  Here 
is  a  resemblance.  Cut  the  former,  confounding  the  spirit  with  the 
letter,  made  the  prohibition — which  grew  out  of  their  rule  of  absolute 
veracity  and  mutual  confidence  in  each  other — a  positive  law,  uncon- 
ditionally binding,  not  only  within  their  own  community,  but  in  the 
general  intercourse  of  life.  Christ  prohibited  oaths,  on  the  other  hand, 
not  by  an  enactment  binding  only  from  without,  but  by  a  law  develop- 
ing itself  outwardly  from  the  new  spiritual  life  which  he  himself 
implanted  in  his  followers.  Paul  knew  that  an  asseveration,  made  for 
right  ends,  and  in  the  spirit  of  Christ's  command,  was  no  violation  of 
that  command. 

Again,  the  law  of  the  Essenes  prohibited  slavery,  and  so  was  Christ's 
intended  to  subvert  it.  The  sect  agreed  with  the  Saviour  in  seeing  that 
all  men  alike  bear  the  image  of  God,  and  that  none  can  have  the  right, 
by  holding  their  fellows  as  property,  to  degrade  that  image  into  a  brute 
or  a  chattel.  So  far  Essenism  and  Christianity  agTce  ;  but  see  where- 
in they  differ.  The  one  was  a  formula  for  a  small  circle  of  devotees  ; 
the  other  was  a  system  for  the  regeneration  of  mankind  :  the  one  made 
positive  enactments,  acting  by  pressure  from  without;  the  other  im- 
planted new  moral  principles,  to  work  from  within  :  the  one  put  its 
law  in  force  at  once,  and  declared  that  no  slave  could  be  held  in  its 
communion ;  the  other  gave  no  direct  command  upon  the  subject. 
Yet  the  whole  spirit  of  Christ's  teaching  tended  to  create  in  men's 
minds  a  moral  sense  of  the  evil  of  a  relation  so  utterly  subvei'sive  of  all 
that  is  good  in  humanity,  and  thus  to  effect  its  entire  abolition. 

Let  us  take  another  apparent  resemblance.  The  Essenes  devoted 
themselves  much  to  healing  the  sick,  and  so  did  Christ  (and  the  gift  of 
healing  was  imparted  to  the  first  congregations) ;  but  the  agencies  which 
they  employed  were  essentially  different.  They  made  use  of  natural 
remedies,  drawn  from  the  vegetable  and  mineral  kingdoms,  and  hand- 
ed down  the  knowledge  thereof  in  their  books  ;*  but  the  Saviour  and 
his  apostles  wrought  their  cures  by  no  intermediate  agents,  but  by  the 
direct  operation  of  power  from  on  high.t  Even  when  Christ  did  make 
use  of  physical  means,  the  results  were  always  out  of  proportion  to  them. 

Finally,  let  us  compare  the  scope  of  Essenism,  as  a  whole,  with  the 
aims  of  Christ's  mission.  Essenism,  probably  originating  in  a  com- 
mingling of  Judaism  with  the  old  Oriental|  theosophy,  manifested  a 

*  Joseph.,  B-  J.,  ii.,  viii.,  6:  IvOcv  (i.e.,  from  old  writings)  avToli  vpoi  ^cpa-irda^  naOiir,  ^i'^,ai 

Tt  aXcliTt'iptoi  Kill  \if)<0)'  l^idrtiTci  uiepcinuivTut. 

t  Cf.  wliat  is  said  fiirtliur  on,  under  the  liead  of  "  The  Mh-acles  of  Clirist." 

t  Some  modem  writers  jirefer  to  derive  Essenism  from  Alexaudriiui  Platonism  trans- 

jdajited  into  ralcsline,  but  I  can  lind  no  proof  that  their  view  explains  the  general  character 


CHRIST'S  TEACHING  FROM  WITHIN.  39 

spirit  at  once  monkish  and  schismatic*  How  strong  a  contrast  does 
such  a  system  present  to  the  active  spirit  of  the  Gospel,  aiming  only  to 
implant  holy  feelings,  and  so  to  secure  holy  lives,  seeking  every  where 
for  needy  souls,  and,  wherever  the  need  appears,  pouring  forth  its  ex- 
haustless  treasures  without  stint !  Such  a  spirit  broke  away  at  once 
the  wall  of  separation  between  man  and  man,  which  the  aristocratic 
and  exclusive  spii'itual  life  of  Essenism  was  ever  striving  to  build  u[). 

§  27.  Supposed  Influence  of  the  Alexandrian- Jewish  Doctrines. 
A  few  words  in  regard  to  the  supposed  influence  of  the  doctrines 
of  the  Alexandrian  Jews  upon  Christ's  culture.  Even  admitting  that 
these  doctrines  penetrated  into  Palestine,  it  can  by  no  means  be  pre- 
supposed that  they  entered  into  Galilee,  and  especially  into  the  nar- 
row circle  of  the  common  people  within  which  he  was  educated.  The 
grounds  on  which  some  profess  to  find  traces  of  such  an  influence  in 
■  the  discourses  of  Christ  would  serve  as  well  to  prove  that  Christianity 
derived  its  origin  from  Brama  or  Buddhu.f 

§  28.  Affinity  of  Christianity,  as  absolute  Truth,  for  the  various  opposing 
Religious  Systems, 
On  the  dissolution  of  Judaism,  its  elements,  originally  joined  togeth- 
er in  a  living  unity,  necessarily  produced  various  religious  tendencies, 
which  mutually  opposed  and  excluded  each  other.  In  all  these  we 
can  find  something  akin  to  the  new  ci'eation  of  Christianity.  And 
wherever  Christianity  appears  for  the  first  time,  or  reveals  itself  anew 
in  its  own  glory,  it  must  offer  some  points  of  afl[inity  for  the  different 
opposing  systems.  The  living,  perfect  truth  has  points  of  tangency  for 
the  one-sided  forms  of  error ;  though  we  may  not  be  thereby  enabled 
to  put  together  the  perfect  whole  from  the  scattered  and  repellent 
fragments. 

§  29.   Christ's  Teaching  revealed  from  rvithin,  not  received  from  xoithout. 

Had  the  source  of  Christ's  mighty  power  been  merely  a  doctrine,  it 

might  have  been  received,  or  at  least  suggested,  from  abroad.     But  his 

or  the  individual  features  of  Essenism  as  well  as  that  iu  the  text.  Moreover,  I  remain  of 
the  opinion  that  the  doctrines  of  the  Therapeuta  and  the  Essenes  were  allied,  but  inde- 
pendent i-eligious  tendencies. 

*  1  can  give  no  other  translation  than  the  following  to  the  passage  in  Josephus  (ArchaBol., 
xviii.,  1,  5)  which  speaks  of  the  Essenes.  It  will  be  seen  that  I  take  the  word  eipy6ncvQi, 
not  in  the  passive,  but  in  the  middle  sense.  "  They  send,  it  is  true,  their  offerings  to  tlie 
temple,  but  they  bring  no  sacrifices,  because  they  so  greatly  prefer  their  own  way  of  puri- 
fying and  sanctifying  themselves ;  and,  for  fear  of  defilement  by  taking  part  with  the  rest 
of  the  people,  they  keep  away  from  the  common  sanctuary,  and  make  their  sacrifices  apart, 
surrounded  only  by  the  initiated." 

t  Cf.  my  Kirchengeschichte,  2d  edit.,  Part  I.,  for  the  relation  between  the  Alexandrian 
theology  and  Christianity. 


40  CULTURE  OF  JESUS. 

power  lay  in  the  impression  which  his  manifestation  and  life  as  the  In- 
carnate God  px-oduced ;  and  this  could  never  have  been  derived  from 
without.*  The  peculiar  import  of  his  doctrine,  as  such,  consists  in  its 
relation  to  himself  as  a  part  of  his  self-revelation,  an  image  of  his  un- 
originated  and  inherent  life  ;  and  this  alone  suffices  to  defy  all  attempts 
at  external  explanation. 

§  30.   The  popular  Sentiment  in  regard  to  Christ's  Connexion  with  the 

Schools. 
Had  Jesus  been  trained  in  the  Jewish  seminaries,!  his  opponents 
would,  doubtless,  have  reproached  him  with  the  arrogance  of  setting 
up  for  master  where  he  himself  had  been  a  pupil.  But,  on  the  contra- 
ry, we  find  that  they  censured  him  for  attempting  to  explain  the  Scrip- 
tures without  having  enjoyed  the  advantages  of  the  schools  (John,  vii., 
15).  His  first  appearance  as  a  teacher  in  the  synagogue  at  Nazareth 
caused  even  greater  surprise,  as  he  was  known  there,  not  as  one  learned 
in  the  Law,  but  rather  as  a  cai-penter's  son,  who  had,  perhaps,  himself 
worked  at  his  father's  trade.i;  The  general  impression  of  his  discourses 
every  where  was,  that  they  contained  totally  difierent  materials  from 
tliose  furnished  by  the  theological  schools  (Matt.,  vii.,  29). 


*  We  recall  here  the  profound  sentiment  of  a  prophetic  German  mind :  "  The  pearl  of 
Christianity  is  a  life  hidden  in  God,  a  truth  in  Christ  the  Mediator,  a  power  which  consists 
neither  in  words  and  forms,  nor  in  dogmas  and  outward  acts  ;  it  cannot,  therefore,  be  val- 
ued by  the  common  standards  of  logic  or  ethics." — Hamann,  iv.,  285. 

t  Dr.  Paulus  supposes  that  Christ,  because  he  was  called  Rabbi,  not  only  by  his  disci- 
ples, but  by  the  distinguished  Rabbi  Nicodemus,  and  even  by  his  enemies  (John,  vi.,  25), 
obtained  that  title  in  the  way  usual  among  the  Jews  ;  and  he  intimates  that  Christ  studied 
with  the  rabbis  of  the  Essenes,  and  perhaps  obtained  the  degree  from  them  (Life  of  Christ, 
i.,  1, 12i).  But  when  we  remember  that  he  stood  at  the  head  of  a  party  which  recognized 
his  prophetic  character,  we  can  see  why  others,  who  did  not  recognize  it,  would  yet  call 
him  their  master,  c.  g-.,  Matt.,  xvii.,  24  ;  b  i^tiduKa'Xos  ii^iwi'.  Nicodemus,  however,  did  really 
acknowledge  him  as  a  Divine  teacher;  nor  were  those  who  addressed  him  as  Rabbi,  in 
John,  vi.,  2.),  by  any  means  his  enemies.  This  style  of  address,  therefoi-c.  does  not  imply 
his  possession  of  a  title  from  a  Jewish  tribunal,  but  rather  arose  in  the  circle  of  followers 
that  he  gathered  around  him.  As  to  the  Essenes,  it  cannot  be  proved  that  they  created 
rabbis,  as  did  the  Jewish  synagogues ;  and  if  they  did,  such  titles  would  hardly  be  recog- 
nized by  the  prevailing  party,  the  Pharisees. 

t  It  cannot  be  decided  certainly  that  this  was  the  case.  There  was  a  tradition  in  prim- 
itive Christian  times  to  that  effect;  so  Justin  Martyr  (Dialog.,  c.  Tryph.,  316)  says:  ravra 
Tu  TCKTOvtKil  ifiY"  iipyd^CTO  iv  at'Opii-rroti  Siv,  Kal  '^vyu,  iia  toiitoiv  Kai  tu  riji  &iKmoorvinji  oVjiSoXa  iiii- 
aKuv  Kai  iiipyt]  (iiov.  It  may  be  that  tliis,  and  the  tradition,  also,  that  Christ  was  destitute 
of  personal  beauty,  were  rather  ideal  than  historical  conceptions,  framed  to  confonn  with 
his  humble  condition  "in  the  fonn  of  a  servant."  Christ  was  not  to  come  fortli  from  a  high 
position,  but  from  a  lowly  workshop  ;  as,  according  to  the  reproach  of  C'elsus.  his  first  fol- 
lowers were  mechanics.  IJutthe  report  may  have  been  true,  and  was,  if  the  ordinary  reading 
of  Mark,  vi.,  3,  be  correct.  Against  this  has  been  adduced  the  following  passage  in  Ori^., 
cont.  Ceh.,  vi.,  36,  viz. :  on  oviaijiov  tujv  iv  rali  iKK^tjalaii  tjirponhitiiv  cvii)ycXi(jjv  tIktuiv  avrdi  b  'irf 
aovi  avayi-jpaiTTai.  The  reading  in  Mark,  vi.,  3,  may  have  been  altered  before  the  time  of 
Origcn,  from  a  false  pride  tliat  took  oflence  at  Clu-ist's  working  as  a  common  mechanic, 
and  a  foolish  desire  to  conciliate  the  pagans,  who  reproached  Christians  witli  tliis  feature 


CONSCIOUSNESS  OF  MESSIAHSHIP.  41 


CHAPTER  II. 

COURSE  OF  CHRIST'S  LIFE  UP  TO  THE  OPENING  OF  HIS  PUBLIC  MIN- 
ISTRY. 

§  31.   Growing  Consciousness  of  His  MessiahsMp  in  Christ. 

ALTHOUGH  so  many  years  of  our  Saviour's  life  are  veiled  in  ob- 
scurity, v^^e  cannot  believe  that  the  full  consciousness  of  a  Di- 
vine call  which  he  displayed  in  his  later  years  was  of  sudden  growth. 
If  a  great  man  accomplishes,  within  a  very  brief  period,  labours  of  par- 
amount importance  to  the  world,  and  which  he  himself  regards  as  the 
task  of  his  life,  we  must  presume  that  the  strength  and  energies  of  his 
previous  years  were  concentrated  into  that  limited  period,  and  that  the 
former  only  constituted  a  time  of  preparation  for  the  latter. 

Most  of  all  must  this  be  true  of  the  labours  of  Christ,  the  gi-eateet 
and  most  important  that  the  world  has  known.  We  have  the  right  to 
presume  that  He  who  assumed  as  his  task  the  salvation  of  the  human 
race  made  his  whole  previous  existence  to  bear  upon  this  mighty  labour. 
The  idea  of  the  Messiah,  as  Redeemer  and  King,  streamed  forth  in  Di- 
vine light,  from  the  course  of  the  theocracy  and  the  scattered  intima- 
tions of  the  Old  Testarnent,  in  full  extent  and  clearness,  and  in  Divine 
light  he  recognized  this  Messiahship  as  his  own  ;  and  this  conscious- 
ness of  God  within  him  harmonized  with  the  extraordinary  phenom- 
ena that  occurred  at  his  birth. 

But  the  negative  side  of  the  Messiahship,  namely,  its  relation  to  sin, 
he  could  not  learn  from  self-contemplation.     He  could  not  learn  de- 

in  the  life  of  their  founder.  Fritzsche  founds  an  ineffectual  argument  on  the  following  in- 
ternal ground,  viz.:  "  Christ's  working  at  a  trade  would  not  have  interfered  with  his  ap- 
pearing as  a  public  teacher.  The  Jews  had  no  contempt  for  artisans,  and  even  the  scribes 
sometimes  supported  themselves  by  mechanical  toils."  True,  the  scribes  might  occasion- 
ally work  at  trades  without  reproach,  but  to  be  merely  a  mechanic  (and  no  scribe)  was 
quite  a  different  thing;  so  that  the  ensuing  objection,  "  Hoio  comes  this  carpenter  to  set  up 
as  our  teacher?"  was  quite  in  character,  even  among  Jews.  It  does  not  follow  because, 
afterward,  only  designations  of  family  are  given  in  the  passage,  that  therefore  the  first 
designation  was  fixed  upon  him  only  as  "the  son  of  the  carpenter;"  for,  certainly,  the  two 
ideas,  "he  himself  is  only  a  carpenter,"  and  "his  relations  live  among  us  as  ordinary  peo- 
ple," hang  well  together.  They  could  utter,  first,  the  most  cutting  contrast,  "he  is  a  car- 
penter, hke  the  others,  and  he  now  will  be  a  prophet,"  and  then  mention  only  his  relations 
who  were  yet  living,  but  not  Joseph,  who  was  already  dead. 

It  is  perfectly  in  accordance  with  the  genius  of  Christianity  (although  not  necessarily  flow- 
ing from  it),  that  the  Highest  should  thus  spring  from  an  humble  walk  of  life,  and  that  tlie 
Divine  glory  should  manifest  itself  at  first  to  men  in  so  lowly  a  form.  The  Redeemer  thus 
ennobled  human  labour  and  the  foi-ms  of  common  life  ;  there  was  thenceforth  to  be  no 
^dvavaov  in  the  relations  of  human  society.  Thus  began  the  influence  of  Chi-istianity  upon 
the  civil  and  social  relations  of  men — an  influence  which  has  gone  on  increasing  from  that 
day  to  this. 


42  CONSCIOUSNESS  OF  MESSIAHSHIP. 

pravily  by  expeiience  ;  yet,  without  this  knowledge,  although  the  idea 
of  the  Messiah  as  theocratic  king  might  have  been  fully  developed  in 
his  mind,  an  essential  element  of  his  relations  to  humanity  would  have 
remained  foreign  to  him.  But  although  his  personal  experience  could 
not  unfold  this  peculiar  modification  of  the  Messianic  consciousness, 
many  of  its  essential  features  were  continually  suggested  by  his  inter- 
course with  the  outer  world.  There,  in  all  the  relations  of  life,  he  saw 
human  depravity  and  its  attendant  wretchedness.  The  sight,  and  the 
sympathizing  love  which  it  awoke,  made  a  profound  impression  upon 
his  soul,  and  formed,  at  least,  a  basis  for  the  consciousness  of  his  own 
relation  to  it  as  Messiah. 

We  may  assume,  then,  that  when  he  reached  his  thirtieth  year,*  fully 
assured  of  his  call  to  the  Messiahship,  he  waited  only  for  a  sign  from 
God  to  emerge  from  his  obscurity  and  enter  upon  his  work.  This 
sign  was  to  be  given  him  by  means  of  the  last  of  God's  witnesses  un- 
der the  old  dispensation,  whose  calling  it  was  to  prepare  the  way  for 
the  new  developement  of  the  kingdom  of  God — by  John  the  Baptist,  the 
last  representative  of  the  prophetic  spirit  of  the  Old  Testament,  whose 
relation  to  Christ  and  his  office  we  shall  now  more  particularly  ex- 
amine.! 

•  The  age  at  which  the  Levites  entered  on  their  office. — Nuxnb.,  iv. 

t  A  promising  young  theologian  of  Liibeck,  L.  von  Rohden,  has  lately  put  forth  an  excel- 
lent treatise  on  this  subject,  well  adapted  for  general  circulation,  entitled  "Johannes  der 
Taufer,  in  seinem  Leben  and  Wirken  dargestellt." 


BOOK    III. 


PREPARATIVES  TO  THE  PUBLIC  MINISTRY  OF  CHRIST. 


PART  I.     OBJECTIVE  PREPARATION.— JOHN  THE  BAPTIST. 
PART  II.     SUBJECTIVE  PREPARATION.— THE  TEMPTATION. 


BOOK  III. 

PREPARATIVES  TO   THE  PUBLIC  MINISTRY  OF  CHRIST. 

PART   I. 

OBJECTIVE  PREPARATION.     THE  MINISTRY  OF  JOHN  THE 

BAPTIST. 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE  CALLING  OF  THE  BAPTIST,  AND  HIS  RELATIONS  TO  THE  JEWS. 
§  32.  Hotofar  the  Baptist  revived  the  Expectation  of  a  Messiah. 

A  PROCLAMATION  of  the  approaching  kingdom  of  God,  involv- 
ing the  restoration  of  the  sunken  glory  of  the  Theocracy,  and  the 
dawning  of  a  brighter  day  upon  God's  oppressed  ones,  was  essentially 
necessary  as  a  preparation  for  Christ's  public  ministry. 

But  this  was  not  all ;  it  was  equally  necessary  to  announce  Hkm  who 
was  called  to  the  accomplishment  of  this  great  work.  The  expectation 
of  the  kingdom  and  the  king  should  always  have  gone  together;  but 
we  find  that  they  did  not  actually  do  so.  The  prophecies  of  the  gen- 
eral renewal  were  often  distinct  from  those  which  foretold  the  agent 
chosen  by  God  to  accomplish  it ;  and  the  hope  of  the  former  often  ex- 
isted in  minds  which  had  lost  sight  of  the  latter.  A  Philo  proves  this. 
The  Greek  and  Alexandrian  culture,  and  perhaps  the  combination  of 
the  two  in  the  religious  Realism  of  Palestine,  may  have  tended  to  bring 
about  this  result.  Be  that  as  it  may,  it  is  essential  for  our  purpose  to 
keep  the  two  ideas — the  announcement  of  the  kingdom  and  the  proc- 
lamation of  the  Messiah — separate  from  each  other. 

Some  suppose  that  John  the  Baptist  was  the  first*  to  suggest  the  idea 
of  a  Messiah  to  the  Jewish  mind  of  that  day.  But  certainly  this  idea, 
so  thoroughly  interwoven  with  the  theocratic  consciousness,  could  not 
have  fallen  into  oblivion  ;  nay,  the  sufferings  of  the  people,  their  shame 
at  being  slaves  to  those  whom  they  believed  themselves  destined  to 
rule,  and  their  desire  for  deliverance  from  this  degrading  bondage,  must 
have  constantly  tended  to  bring  it  more  and  more  vividly  before  them. 
It  would  be  going  too  far,  then,  to  say  that  this  idea  had  been  lost  out  of 

■  So  Schleiermacher  (Christliche  Sittenlehre,  p.  19)  states  that  John's  work  was  "  to  re- 
vive the  forgotten  idea  of  the  Messiah." 


46  JOHN  THE  BAPTIST. 

the  mind  of  that  age,  and  that  its  revival  was  due  to  the  efforts  of  a 
single  individual.  Much  rather  should  we  conceive  that  the  spirit  of  the 
individual  was  stirred  by  an  impulse  from  the  spirit  of  the  age.  But 
while  the  general  tendency  of  the  popular  mind  prepared  the  way  for 
John,  his  labours  reacted  mightily  upon  the  spirit  of  the  age,  and  form- 
ed, indeed,  a  new  epoch  in  the  hopes  of  men  for  the  appearance  of  the 
Kingdom  and  of  the  Messiah.  Christ  himself  makes  this  epoch  the 
transition-period  between  the  old  and  the  new  dispensations.* 

It  was  essential,  also,  to  this  preparation  for  the  Messiah,  that  the 
minds  of  the  people  should  obtain  a  clear  conception  of  the  object  to 
which  their  hopes  were  directed,  and  the  means  by  which  it  was  to  be 
obtained,  involving  a  more  correct  notion  of  the  work  and  kingdom  of 
Messiah,  and  of  the  moral  requisites  for  participation  therein.  All  this 
belonged  to  the  calling  of  the  Old-Testament  order  of  prophets,  of 
which  John  constituted  the  apex.  We  must  look  for  the  peculiar  fea- 
tures of  his  position  in  the  fact  that  he  himself  not  only  formed  the 
point  of  transition  to  the  new  era,  but  was  allowed  to  recognize  and 
point  out  the  Messiah,  and  to  give  the  signal  for  the  beginning  of  his 
public  ministry, 

§  33.  Causes  of  Obscurity  in  the  Accounts  left  ns  of  the  Baptist. — Sources: 
The  Evangelists.  Josephus. 
The  difficulties  and  obscurities  that  remain  in  the  accounts  of  this 
remarkable  man  seem  to  have  arisen  necessarily  from  the  peculiar 
stand-point  which  he  occupied.  In  a  prophet  or  a  forerunner,  we 
must  always  distinguish  between  what  he  utters  with  clear  self-con- 
sciousness, and  what  lies  beyond  the  utterance,  concealed  even  from 
himself,  until  a  later  period ;  between  the  fundamental  idea,  and  the 
form,  perhaps  not  wholly  fitting,  in  which  it  veils  itself.  Opposite  ele- 
ments always  meet  each  other  in  an  epoch  which  constitutes  the  tran- 
sition-point from  one  stage  of  developement  to  another;  and  we  can- 
not look  for  a  logical  and  connected  mode  of  thinking  in  the  repre- 
sentative of  such  an  epoch.  In  some  of  his  utterances  we  may  find 
traces  of  the  old  period  ;  in  others,  longings  for  the  new;  and  in  bring- 
ing them  together,  we  may  find  different  views  which  cannot  always 
be  made  perfectly  to  harmonize. 

The  nature  of  the  authorities  to  which  we  are  confined  makes  it  pe- 
culiarly difficult  to  come  at  the  objective  truth  in  regard  to  John  the 
Baptist.  On  the  one  side  we  have  the  accounts  of  the  Evangelists, 
given  from  the  Christian  stand-point,  and  for  religious  ends ;  and  on 
the  other  that  of  Josephus,]  which  is  purely  historical  in  its  character 
and  aims. 

*  Matt,  xi.,  12.     Wc  shall  have  occasion  to  say  more  on  this  passage  hereafter. 
t  ArcliBBol.,  xix.,  ]. 


AUTHORITIES.  47 

As  to  the  first,  it  is  very  probable  that  John  could  be  better  under- 
stood in  the  light  of  Christianity  than  he  understood  himself  and  his 
mission.  The  aims  of  a  preparatory  and  transition-period  are  always 
better  comprehended  after  their  accomplishment  than  before;  so,  truths 
which  were  veiled  from  John's  apprehension  stood  clearly  forth  be- 
fore the  minds  of  the  Evangelists.  But  this  very  fact  may  have  caused 
the  obscurity  which  we  find  in  their  accounts  of  the  Baptist,  We  are 
very  apt,  in  describing  a  lower  point  of  view  from  a  higher,  to  attribute 
to  the  former  what  belongs  only  to  the  latter.  Any  one  who  has  passed 
through  a  subordinate  and  preparatory  stage  of  thought  to  a  higher  one, 
will  find  it  hard  to  keep  the  distinction  between  the  two  clearly  before 
his  consciousness  ;  they  blend  themselves  together  in  spite  of  him.  So, 
perhaps,  it  may  have  happened  that  the  distinctive  differences  between 
the  stand-point  of  John  and  that  of  Christianity  were  lost  sight  of  when 
the  evangelical  accounts  were  prepared,  and  that  the  Baptist  was  rep- 
resented as  nearer  to  Christianity  than  he  really  was.  The  likelihood 
of  this  result  would  be  all  the  greater  if  the  Christian  writer  had  been 
himself  a  disciple  of  John ;  such  a  one,  even  though  endowed  with  the 
sincerest  love  of  truth,  would  naturally  see  more  in  the  words  of  his 
old  master  than  the  latter  himself,  under  his  peculiar  circumstances, 
could  possibly  have  intended.  After  a  prophecy  has  reached  its  fulfil- 
ment, it  would  be  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to  reproduce  the  precise 
consciousness  under  which  the  prediction  was  uttered. 

If,  therefore,  we  find,  on  close  inquiry,  that  the  historical  statements 
are  somewhat  obscured  by  subjective  influences,  our  estimate  of  their 
veracity  need  be  in  no  wise  affected  thereby.  Such  a  result  would 
not  conflict  in  the  least  with  the  only  tenable  idea  of  Inspiration. 
The  organs  which  the  Holy  Ghost  illuminated  and  inspired  to  convey 
his  truth  to  men  retained  their  individual  peculiarities,  and  remained 
within  the  sphere  of  the  psychological  laws  of  our  being.  Besides, 
Inspiration,  both  in  its  nature  and  its  object,  refers  only  to  man's  re- 
ligious interests  and  to  points  connected  with  it.  But  practical  religion 
requires  only  a  knowledge  of  the  truth  itself;  it  needs  not  to  under- 
stand the  gradual  genetic  developement  of  the  truth  in  the  intellect,  or 
to  distinguish  the  various  stages  of  its  advance  to  distinct  and  perfect 
consciousness.  On  the  other  hand,  these  latter  are  precisely  the  aims 
towards  which  scientific  history  directs  itself.  It  follows,  therefore,  that 
the  interest  of  practical  religion  and  that  of  scientific  history  may  not 
always  run  in  the  same  channel ;  and  the  latter  must  give  place  to  the 
former,  especially  in  points  so  vital  as  the  direct  impression  which 
Christ  made  upon  mankind.  Frequent  illustrations  of  this  distinction 
are  afforded  by  the  interpretations  of  passages  from  the  Old  Testament 
given  by  the  apostles. 

In  all  our  inquiries  into  the  evangelical  histories,  we  must  keep  in 


43  JOHN  THE  BAPTIST. 

view  the  fact  that  they  were  written  not  to  satisfy  scientific,  but  re- 
ligious wants  ;  not  to  afford  materials  for  systematic  history,  but  to  set 
forth  the  ground  of  human  salvation  in  Christ  and  his  kingdom.  There 
was,  indeed,  one  who  could  distinguish  the  different  stages  in  the  devel  • 
opement  of  revelation  at  a  single  piercing  glance  ;  but  this  one  was  He 
in  whom  God  and  man  were  united.  He  himself  told  his  Apostles  that 
he  had  this  power,  and  his  words  in  regard  to  the  stand-point  of  John 
the  Baptist  illustrate  it.    These  words  alone  must  form  our  guiding  light. 

It  might  be  inferred,  if  what  we  have  said  be  true,  that  the  account 
of  Josephus,  which  proceeds  from  a  purely  historical  interest,  should  be 
preferred  to  that  of  the  Evangelists.  But  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that 
historical  events  can  only  be  correctly  imderstood  when  viewed  from 
the  stand-point  of  the  province  to  which  they  belong ;  and  so  events 
that  fall  within  the  sphere  of  religion  are  only  intelligible  from  a  re- 
lio-ious  stand-point.  And  as  John's  import  to  the  history  of  the  world 
consists  in  the  fact  that  he  formed  the  dividing  line  between  the  two 
stages  of  developement  in  the  kingdom  of  God,  it  cannot  be  fully  un- 
derstood except  by  an  intuitive  religious  sense,  capable  of  appreciating 
relio-ious  phenomena.  Of  such  a  religious  sense  Josephus  was  desti- 
tute. Now  the  religious  sense  can  get  along  without  the  scientific  ; 
but  the  latter  cannot  do  without  the  former,  where  the  understanding 
of  relio-ious  events  is  concerned ;  and  hence  the  living  peculiarities  of 
John  the  Baptist  vanished  under  the  hands  of  Josephus,  although  he 
was  able  to  apprehend  John's  character  and  appearance  in  their  gen- 
eral features.  To  his  religious  deficiency  must  be  added  his  habit  of 
adapting  himself  to  the  taste  and  culture  of  the  Greeks,  a  habit  which 
could  not  but  wear  away  his  Jewish  modes  of  thought  and  feeling. 
He  saw  in  John  only  a  man  of  moral  ai'dour,  who  taught  the  truth  to 
the  Jews,  rebuked  their  corruptions,  and  offered  them,  instead  of  their 
lustrations  and  outward  righteousness,  a  symbol  of  inward  spiritual 
purification  in  his  water-baptism.  With  such  a  narrow  view  as  this 
we  could  neither  understand  John's  use  of  baptism,  nor  explain  his 
public  labours  among  such  a  people  as  the  Jews.  It  is  but  a  beggarly 
abstraction  from  the  living  individual  elements  which  the  Gospel  ac- 
counts aflbrd. 

§  34.    The  Baptist'' s  Mode  of  Life  and  Teaching  in  the  Desert. 
We  learn  from  .Tosephus*  that  many  pious  and  earnest  men  among 
the  .Tews,  disgusted  with  the  corruptions  of  the  times,  retired,  like  the 
monks  and  hermits  of  Christianity  at  a  later  day,  into  wilderness  spots, 

*  An  example  is  afforded  in  the  case  of  5a7iMS,  of  whom  Josephus,  who  was  his  disciple, 
gives  an  account  in  his  autobiography,  §  2 :  "  iaOfin  fiiv  and  iivipuiv  xpuiittvov,  rpoipriv  6e  r^v 
oiro/idroDj  tlivonivriv  j:poa(t>cp6ncvoi',  ^uxpv  6i  vSan  Ti)v  ijpipav  koX  rfiv  vvktu  ttoXMkH  Xovdptvov  irpof 
ayvc'iav." 


HIS  RELATION  TO  THE  JEWISH  PEOPLE.  49 

and  there,  becoming  teachers  of  Divine  wisdom,  collected  disciples 
around  them.  Such  a  one  was  Jolm.  Consecrated  from  his  birth,  by 
a  sign  from  heaven,  to  his  Divine  calUng,  he  led  a  rigid  and  ascetic 
life  from  his  very  childhood.  Had  we  nothing  but  Josephus's*  account 
to  guide  us,  we  might  suppose  that  Jolm  only  diftered  from  the  other 
teachers  of  the  desert  in  the  fact  that  the  spirit  of  his  teaching  was 
more  practical,  and  tended  to  carry  him  out  into  a  wider  field  of  action. 
While  they  only  revealed  the  truths  of  a  higher  life  to  such  as  sought 
them  in  their  solitude,  he  felt  constrained  to  go  forth  and  raise  his  re- 
proving voice  aloud  among  the  multitude,  to  condemn  the  Jews  fur 
their  vices  and  their  hypocrisy,  and  to  call  them,  abandoning  their  false 
security  and  their  debasing  trust  in  outward  works,  to  seek  the  genuine 
piety  which  comes  from  the  heart.  This  part  of  John's  ministry,  viz., 
his  work  as  a  reformer,  Josephus  has  brought  out  prominently ;  while 
he  has  entirely  failed  to  notice  the  indelible  stamp  of  the  Baptist's  la- 
bours left  upon  the  history  of  the  Theocracy. 

John  had  retired  to  the  desert  region  west  of  the  Dead  Sea,  and 
there  lived  a  life  of  abstinence  and  austerity,  harmonizing  well  with 
his  inwai'd  grief  for  the  corrujjtions  of  his  people.  Like  his  type, 
Elias,  he  wore  coarse  garments,  and  satisfied  his  wants  with  a  nourish 
ment  which  "nature  offei'ed  in  a  species  of  locusts,  sometimes  used  as 
food,  and  wild  honey.t 

§  35.  John  as  Baptist  and  Preacher  of  Repentance. 
While  John  was  thus  sighing  in  solitude  over  the  sins  of  a  degener- 
ate people,  and  praying  that  God  would  soon  send  the  promised 
Deliverer,  the  assurance  was  vouchsafed  to  him  from  above  that  the 
Messiah  should  soon  be  revealed  to  him.  He  felt  himself  called  to 
declare  this  assurance  to  the  people,  and  to  exhort  them  to  prepare 
their  souls  for  the  approaching  epoch.  He  abandoned  the  solitude  of 
the  desert  for  the  banks  of  the  Jordan,|  gathered  the  people  in  hosts 
about  him,  and  announced  to  them  the  coming  appearance  of  both  the 
Messiah  and  his  kingdom,  which  ideas  he  never  separated.  He  pro- 
claimed to  them  that  God  would  sift  his  people,  and  that  the  unworthy 
should  be  condemned  and  excluded  from  the  Theocracy.  He  de- 
nounced as  false  and  treacherous  the  prevailing  idea  that  theocratic 
descent  and  the  observance  of  outward  ceremonies  were  the   only 

*  Archseol.,  xviii.,  v.  2. 

t  In  the  Ebioiiitish  recension  of  Matthew,  we  find  the  food  of  John  described  as  f/Af 
aypiov,  ov  ti  ycvcti  ijv  tov  ndvva,  i>s  lyKp'ts  iv  tXui'u  ("it  had  the  taste  of  manna,  as  a  cake  baked 
in  oil." — Num.,  xi.,  8).  The  simple  statement  of  Matthew  is  here  misrepresented,  and 
even  falsified.  The  uKpiScs  (locusts)  seemed  to  this  writer  food  unwortliy  for  Jolin,  and  be 
makes  iyKpiSeS  (cakes)  oat  of  them,  and  thus  gets  a  chance  of  comparing  John's  food  with 
manna. 

t  We  follow  the  statement  of  Luke  (iii.,  2),  which  has  the  advantage  in  distinguishing 
from  each  other  the  periods  in  JoWs  manifestation. 

D 


50  JOHN  THE  BAPTIST. 

requisites  for  admittance  into  Messiah's  kingdom,  and  exhorted  all  to 
true  repentance  as  the  one  essential  preparation.  He  made  use  of 
baptism  as  a  symbol  of  preparatory  consecration  to  the  Messiah's 
kingdom,  a  course  to  which  he  might  have  been  led  by  the  lustrations 
common  among  the  Jews,  and  by  the  intimations  of  prophecy,  such  as 
Mai.,  iii. ;  Zach.,  xiii. ;  Ezek.,  xxxvi.,  25,  even  if  the  baptism  of  prose- 
lytes was  not  then  extant  among  the  Jews.  Doubtless  the  Baptist 
stood  in  a  special  relation  to  those  that  flocked  about  him  as  followers  ; 
although,  as  preacher  of  repentance,  as  tJie  voice  of  one  crying  in  tJie 
wilderness  (Isai.,  xl.,  3),  whose  duty  it  was  to  prepare  the  way  for  the 
Messiah  amid  a  people  estranged  from  God,  he  held  a  general  and 
common  relation  to  all. 

§  36.  Relations  of  the  Pharisees  and  Saddtccces  to  the  Baj)tist. 

We  are  naturally  led  here  to  inquire  into  the  relations  which  John 
sustained  to  the  different  classes  of  the  Jewish  people.  Was  he,  as 
preacher  of  repentance,  only  a  man  of  the  people,  and  did  the  Phari- 
sees, the  hierarchical  party,  manifest  their  jealous  opposition  from  the 
very  first,  or  did  it  arise  by  degrees  at  a  later  period  ]  Of  one  thing 
we  may  be  sure,  from  Matt.,  iii.,  7,  viz.,  that-  many  Pharisees  were  to 
be  found  among  the  number  that  crowded  about  John  and  submitted 
to  his  baptism.  Yet  Christ,  in  one  of  his  last  discourses  at  .Jerusalem 
(Matt.,  xxi.,  32),  drew  a  striking  contrast  between  the  publicans  who 
believed  in  John's  prophetic  calling,  and  were  led  by  him  to  repent- 
ance, and  the  Pharisees,  who  persevered  in  their  self-sufficiency  and 
unbehef.  The  words  of  Matt.,  xi.,  16,  seem  also  to  indicate  that  the 
general  spirit  of  the  people  was  as  hostile  to  John  as  it  subsequently 
showed  itself  to  Christ,  and  that  only  a  few,  open  to  the  lessons  of 
heavenly  wisdom,  admitted  the  Divine  mission  of  the  Baptist.  So, 
also,  in  Luke,  vii.,  29,  30,  the  course  of  the  people  and  the  publicans, 
in  following  John  and  submitting  to  his  baptism,  is  contrasted  with  the 
very  opposite  conduct  of  the  Pharisees  and  lawyers,  who  "  rejected 
the  counsel  of  God  against  themselves." 

Still, Matthew  (iii.,  7)  states  expressly,  that  '■'■many  Pharisees  and  Sad- 
ducecs  came  to  John's  baptism"  and  the  fonn  of  the  statement  distin- 
guishes these  from  the  ordinary  throng.  It  seems  somewhat  unhistor- 
ical  that  these  sects,  so  opposite  to  each  other,  should  be  named  to- 
gether here,  as  well  as  in  some  other  places  in  the  Gospels  ;  but  an 
explanation  is  perhaps  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that  it  was  customary  to 
name  them"  together  on  the  ground  of  their  common  hatred  to  Chris- 
tianity. It  appears  improbable  that  men  of  the  peculiar  religious  opin- 
ions of  the  Sadducecs  should  have  been  attracted  by  the  preacher  of 
repentance,  the  forerunner  of  the  Messiah  ;  nor  does  John,  in  his 
flevere  sermon,  make  any  special  reference  to  that  sect,  an  omission 


HIS  RELATION  TO  THE  PHARISEES.  51 

winch  could  hardly  have  occurred  had  any  of  the  sect  so  far  departec, 
from  their  ordinary  habits  as  to  listen  to  his  preaching.*  It  does  not 
follow,  however,  that  the  mention  of  the  Pharisees  is  in  the  same  pre- 
dicament; on  the  contrary,  the  historical  citation  of  the  latter  may 
have  giv'en  rise  to  the  unhistorical  mention  of  the  Sadducees,  Noi 
does  the  fact  that  the  Pharisees,  at  a  later  period,  maintained  an  attitude 
of  hostility  towards  John  prove  that  they  had  opposed  him  from  the 
beginning.  His  rigid  asceticism  and  zeal  for  the  Messiah  were  in  en- 
tire harmony  with  the  spirit  of  their  sect ;  and  they  could  listen  with 
approval  to  his  energetic  reproofs  and  calls  to  repentance,  so  long  as 
they  were  aimed  only  at  the  people  and  the  publicans.  So,  in  the 
Christian  Church,  ardent  reformers  and  witnesses  to  the  truth  have  been 
favoured  even  by  the  heads  of  the  hierarchy,  so  long  as  they  attacked 
only  the  common  faults  and  vices  of  men.  But  the  first  assault  upon 
the  hierarchy  itself  I'oused  all  its  hatred  and  its  vengeance. 

In  the  earlier  period  of  John's  preaching,  then,  there  may  have  been 
nothing  to  excite  the  jealousy  of  the  Pharisees.  INIoreover,  it  is  not 
likely  that  all  who  bore  the  name  of  Pharisees  were  fully  imbued  with 
the  spirit  of  the  sect.  Although  the  majority  of  them,  intent  only  upon 
selfish  and  party  aims,  may  have  regarded  John's  ministry  with  an  eye 
of  suspicion,  there  were  probably  among  them  some  earnest,  upright 
men,  upon  whom  his  preaching  could  not  fail  to  make  an  impression. 
These  two  thoughts  may  serve  to  reconcile  Matt.,  iii.,  7,  with  the  other 
passages  quoted,  in  which  the  hostility  of  the  Phai'isees  is  mentioned. 
Again,  the  expression  of  Christ  in  John,  v.,  35,  seems  to  imply  that  the 
Pharisees  received  and  approved  John's  pi'ophecy  of  the  coming  Mes- 
siah, but  did  not  allow  his  words  to  sink  deep  into  their  hearts  or  to 
operate  upon  their  thoughts  and  inclinations.  The  severe  sermonf  re- 
ported by  the  Evangelists  was  certainly  not  adapted  to  such  as  canje  to 
John,  penitent  and  broken-hearted,  to  obtain  consolation  and  guidance  ; 
but  rather  to  the  haughty  and  arrogant  Pharisee,  who  felt  sure  of  his 
share  in  the  Messiah's  kingdom,  appear  when  it  might,  without  either 
repentance  or  forgiveness.  It  was  these  that  he  stigmatized  as  a 
"  brood  of  vipers,"  and  no  sons  of  Abraham.  It  was  these  to  whom  he 
said,  in  tones  of  warning  and  reproof,  "  Who  has  told  you  that  by 
simple  baptism  you  shall  escape  God's  coming  judgment  1  Would 
you  really  escape  it  1  Then  repent,  and  do  works  meet  for  repentance. 
Trust  not  to  your  saying  '  Ahraham  is  our  father ;^  for  I  tell  you  that 

*  We  cannot  support  the  expression  of  Matthew  by  the  statement  of  Josephus  (xviii., 
I.,  4),  that  the  Sadducees  were  accustomed  to  accommodate  their  own  convictions  to  the 
principles  of  the  Pharisees,  on  account  of  the  strong  liold  which  the  latter  had  upon  the 
people.  In  this  case,  at  least,  no  such  accommodation  was  required,  from  the  repute  in 
which  John  was  held  among  the  Pharisees. 

t  Luke,  iii.,  7 ;  Matt.,  iii.,  7.  Luke  reports  it  as  addressed  to  the  people ;  Matthew  to 
the  Pharisees  and  Sadducees. 


52  JOHN  THE  BAPTIST. 

the  (levelopement  of  the  kingdom  is  not  confined  to  the  race  of  Abra- 
ham; nay,  from  these  very  stones  that  lie  upon  the  river  bank,  God 
can  raise  up  his  children." 

In  these  last  words  he  meant  to  tell  them  that  if  the  Jews  disgi-aced 
theii"  Theocratic  descent,  God  would  remove  his  kingdom  from  them 
and  impart  it  unto  strangers.  He  ends  by  proclaiming  that  the  Mes- 
siah would  sift  his  people  thoroughly,  and  exclude  all  that  should  be 
found  unworthy.  Such  preaching  must  have  been  enough  to  imbitter 
and  alienate  the  Pharisees,  even  if  they  had  been  before  disposed  to 
appi'ove  and  favour  tlie  preacher. 

§  37.  Relations  of  John  to  the  People,  and  to  the  narroiocr  circle  of  his 

oiim  Disciples. 
True  penitents  who  came  to  the  Baptist  inquiring  the  way  of  life 
found  in  the  severe  ascetic  a  kind  and  condescending  teacher.  He 
gave  them  no  vague  and  high-sounding  words,  but  adapted  his  instruc- 
tions with  minute  care  to  their  special  condition  and  circumstances. 
John  resembled  the  austere  preachers  of  repentance  who  sprung  up  in 
the  Middle  Ages  in  more  than  one  respect ;  but  especially  in  the  two 
fold  relation  which  he  sustained,  to  the  people  generally,  and  to  his  dis 
ciples  in  particular.  While  the  latter  imitated  his  own  ascetic  piety  in 
order  to  fit  themselves  for  preachers  of  repentance,  he  did  not  demand 
of  the  former  to  abandon  their  ordinary  line  of  life,  even  when  it  was 
one  obnoxious  to  the  prejudices  of  the  Jews ;  the  soldier  was  not  re- 
quired to  leave  the  ranks,  nor  the  tax-gatherer  his  office,  but  only  to 
fulfil  their  respective  duties  with  honesty  and  fidelity.  All  alike  were 
commanded  to  do  good  ;  but  only  those  whose  occupations  were  sinful 
had  to  abandon  them,  and  at  his  command  many  did  so.* 

§  38.  John's  Demands  upon  the  People  compared  tcith  those  of  Christ. 
— His  humhle  Opinion  of  his  oion  Calling, 
But  how  very  moderate  do  John's  requirements  appear  in  compari- 
son with  those  of  Christ,  who  demanded  at  the  very  outset  an  absolute 
sacrifice  of  the  will  and  the  affections!  This  difference  arose  natural- 
ly, however,  from  the  different  positions  which  they  occupied.  John 
was  fully  conscious  that  the  moral  regeneration  which  was  indispensa- 
ble to  admittance  into  the  Messiah's  kingdom  could  only  be  accom- 
jjlished  by  a  Divine  principle  of  life ;  and,  knowing  that  to  impart  this 
was  beyond  his  power,  he  confined  himself  to  a  prcparatorn  purifica- 
tion of  the  morals  of  the  people.  The  great,  the  God-like  feature  of 
his  character  was  his  thorough  understanding  of  himself  and  his  calling. 
Filled  as  he  was  with  enthusiasm,  he  yet  felt  that  he  was  but  the  hum- 
ble instrument  of  the  Divine  Spirit,  called,  not  to  found  the  new  crea- 

"  Matt.,  xxi.,  32. 


HIS  RELATION  TO  MESSIAH.  53 

tion,  but  only  to  froclaim  it ;  nor  did  the  thronging  of  eager  thousands 
to  hang  upon  his  lips,  nor  the  enthusiastic  love  of  his  own  immediate 
followers,  ever  ready  to  glorify  their  master,  in  the  least  degree  blind 
his  perceptions  of  duty,  or  raise  him  above  his  calling.  Convinced  that 
he  was  inspired  of  God  to  prepare,  and  not  to  create,  he  never  pre- 
tended to  work  miracles,  nor  did  his  disciples,  strongly  as  he  impressed 
them,  ever  attribute  miraculous  powers  to  him. 


CHAPTER  II. 

RELATION  OF  THE  BAPTIST  TO  MESSIAH. 

§  39.  JoJin's  Explanation  of  his  Relation  to  the  Messiah.      The  Bap- 
tism hi)  Water  and  by  Fire. 

CAREFULLY,  however,  as  John  avoided  exciting  false  expecta- 
tions, they  could  hardly  fail  to  arise  at  a  period  so  full  of  fore- 
boding and  hope  for  the  coming  of  Messiah,  after  time  enough  had 
elapsed  for  him  to  make  a  powerful  impression  upon  the  public  mind 
as  a  preacher  of  repentance  and  proclaimer  of  a  better  future.*  Many 
of  those  whom  his  preaching  had  so  deeply  moved  became  uneasy  to 
ascertain  his  true  relation  to  the  Messiah ;  and  as  his  language  on  the 
subject  was  always  concise,  and  rather  suggestive  than  explanatoiy, 
they  were  inclined  to  think  that  his  real  character  was  only  kept  in  the 
back  ground  for  the  time,  and  would  afterward  be  gradually  unfolded. 
But  when  the  Baptist  saw  that  men  imiscd  in  their  hearts  whether  he 
were  the  Christ  or  no,\  he  resolved  to  define  his  relation  to  the  Mes- 
siah explicitly  and  unmistakeably.  His  mission,  he  told  them,  was  to 
baptize  by  water,  as  a  symbol  of  the  preparatory  repentance  which  had 
to  open  the  way  for  that  renewal  and  purification  of  the  nation  by  Di- 
vine power  which  was  to  be  expected  in  the  Messiah  ;  the  lofty  one 
that  was  to  follow,  raised  so  far  above  himself,  that  he  should  be  digni- 
fied by  performing  for  him  the  most  menial  services.  He  it  was  that 
should  baptize  them  roith  the  Holy  Ghost  and  icithjire  ;  that  is  to  say, 
that  as  his  (John's)  followers  were  entirely  immersed  in  the  w^ater,  so 
the  Messiah  would  immerse  the  souls  of  believers  in  the  Holy  Grhost, 
imparted  by  himself;  so  that  it  should  thoroughly  penetrate  their 
being,  and  form  within  them  a  new  principle  of  life.  And  this  Spirit- 
baptism  was  to  be  accompanied  by  a  baptism  ofJirc.\     Those  who  re- 

*  Paul's  words  (Acts,  xiii.,  25)  lead  us  to  infer  that  this  took  place  first  towards  the  end 
of  John's  career.  t  Luke,  iii.,  15. 

t  Some  think  the  "fire"  is  used  as  a  symbol  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  inasmuch  as  it  is  em- 
ployed in  other  places  in  Scripture  to  denote  Divine  influences.     In  this  view  of  the  pas- 


64  JOHN  THE  BAPTIST. 

fused  to  be  penetrated  by  the  Spirit  of  the  Divine  life  should  be  de- 
stroyed by  the  fire  of  the  Divine  judgments.  The  "sifting"  by  fire 
ever  goes  along  with  the  advance  of  the  Spirit,  and  consumes  all  who 
will  not  appropriate  the  latter.  So  John  represents  the  Messiah  as  ap- 
pearing with  his  "  fan"  in  his  hands,  to  purify  the  "threshing-floor"  of 
his  kingdom,  to  gather  the  Avorthy  into  the  glorified  congregation  of 
God,  and  to  cast  out  the  unworthy  and  deliver  them  over  to  the  Di- 
vine judgments. 

§  40.  Julin's  Concej)tion  of  Messiah'' s  Kingdom. 
Let  us  inquire  now  upon  what  view  of  the  calling  and  work  of  the 
Messiah,  and  of  the  nature  of  bis  kingdom,  these  expressions  of  the 
Baptist  were  founded.  He  contradicts  the  notion,  so  prevalent  among 
the  Jews,  that  all  the  descendants  of  Abraham  who  outwardly  observed 
the  religion  of  their  fathers  would  be  taken  into  the  Messiah's  king- 
dom, while  his  heavy  judgments  would  fall  upon  the  pagans  alone. 
On  the  contrary,  he  maintains  the  necessity,  for  all  who  would  enter 
that  kino-dom,  of  a  moral  new  birth,  which  he  sets  forth  to  them  by  the 
Spirit-baptism  ;  and  proclaims,  as  a  necessary  preparation  for  this  new 
birth,  a  consciousness  of  sin  and  longing  to  be  free  from  it ;  all  which 
is  implied  in  the  word  jueravota,  when  stated  as  the  necessary  condi- 
tion of  obtaining  the  promised  baptism  of  the  Spirit,  He  expects  this 
kingdom  to  be  risible;  but  yet  conceives  it  as  purely  spiritual,  as  a 
community  filled  and  inspired  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  and  existing,  in 
communion  of  the  Divine  life,  with  the  Messiah  as  its  visible  King  ; 
so  that,  what  had  not  been  the  case  before,  the  idea  of  the  Theocracy 
and  its  manifestation  should  precisely  correspond  to  each  other.  He 
has  already  a  presentiment  that  the  willing  among  the  pagans  will  be 
incorporated  into  the  kingdom  in  place  of  the  unworthy  Jews  who  shall 
be  excluded.  The  appearance  of  Messiah  will  cause  a  sifting  of  the 
Theocratic  people.  This  presupposes  that  he  will  not  overturn  all 
enemies  arid  set  up  his  kingdom  at  once  by  the  miraculous  power  of 
God,  but  will  manifest  himself  in  such  a  form  that  those  whose  hearts 
are  prepared  for  his  coming  will  recognize  him  as  Messiah,  while  those 
of  ungodly  minds  will  deny  and  oppose  him.  On  the  one  hand,  a  com- 
munity of  the  righteous  will  gather  around  him  of  their  own  accord ; 
and,  on  the  other,  the  enmity  of  the  corrupt  multitude  will  be  called 
forth  and  organized.  The  Messiah  must  do  battle  with  the  universal 
corruption ;   and,  after  the  strife  has  separated  the  wicked  members  of 

sage,  as  the  baptism  by  n-aler  synibulizos  propnratoi-y  repentaiine,  so  that  hyjire  symbol- 
izes the  transDgui-iug  and  purifying  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Our  own  opinion  is,  liowcv- 
er,  that  as  judgment  by  fire  is  si)oken  of  but  a  few  verses  after  (Luke,  iii.,  17),  it  must  be 
taken  in  the  same  sense  here ;  and  the  bap/ism  by  fire  referred  to  the  sifting  process  im- 
mediately mentioned.  Thus  the  fire  is  the  symbol  of  the  power  which  consumes  every 
thing  imi)urc,  iu  the  same  sense  in  which  God  is  snid  to  be  "  a  consuming  fire." 


HIS  RECOGNITION  OF  CHRIST'S  MESSIAHSHTP.         55 

the  Theocratic  nation  from  the  good,  will  come  forth  victorious,  and 
glorify  the  purified  people  of  God  under  his  own  reign, 

§  41.  John's  Recognition  of  Jesus  as  the  Messiah. 

(,1.)  Import  of  his  Baptism  of  Jesus. — (2.)  The  Continuance  of  his  Ministiy. — (3.) 
Possible  Wavei-injj  iu  his  Conviction  of  Christ's  Messialiship. — (4.)  His  Message 
from  Prison. — (5.)  Conduct  of  his  Disciples  towards  Jesus. 

As  John's  conception  of  the  Messiah  included  his  office  in  freeing 
the  people  of  God  from  the  power  of  evil,  and  imparting  to  them  a  new 
life  in  the  life  of  God,  it  ap^^ears  that  he  presupposed  also  the  fulness 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  dwelling  in  him  in  such  a  way  as  that  he  could  be- 
stow it  upon  others.  From  the  first  germ  of  the  idea  of  Messiah  in  the 
Prophets  down  to  the  time  of  Christianity  itself,  we  find  ever  that  a 
just  and  profound  conception  of  his  ojice  involves  in  it  a  higher  idea 
oihis  person.  So,  perhaps,  John,  although  his  expectation  of  a  visible 
realization  of  the  Theocracy  shows  him  as  yet  upon  Old  Testament 
ground,  may  have  at  least  touched  upon  the  stand-point  of  Christianity. 
His  position  was  very  like  that  held  by  Simeon,  and  indeed,  in  general, 
by  all  those  Jews  who,  in  advance  of  the  sentiments  of  the  times,  were 
insj^ired  with  earnest  longings  for  the  appearance  of  the  Messiah,  and 
thus  stood  upon  the  border-land  between  the  two  stages  of  the  kingdom 
of  God.  And  in  John's  representation  of  his  own  inferiority  to  him 
"  that  should  come,"  and  in  his  clear  apprehension  of  the  limits  of  his 
mission  and  his  power — an  apprehension  that  distinguished  him  from 
all  other  founders  of  preparatory  epochs — we  have  an  assurance  that 
he  will  never  imagine  his  preparatory  stand-point  to  be  a  permanent 
one ;  and  that,  as  he  feels  himself  unworthy  "  to  unloose  the  shoe- 
strings" of  the  lofty  One  that  is  to  appear,  so  he  will  bow  himself  iu 
the  same  humble  reverence  when  He,  whom  his  spiritual  sense  shall 
recognize  as  the  expected  one,  shall  appear  in  person  before  him. 

We  are  fully  aware  of  the  objections  that  may  be  raised  against 
these  conclusions.  It  may  be  said,  and  truly,  that  one  may  do  homage 
to  an  idea,  whose  general  outlines  are  present  to  his  intuition,  but  may 
be  unfit  to  recognize  the  realization  of  the  idea  when  presented  before 
his  eyes  in  all  its  features.  The  prejudices  of  his  time  and  circum- 
stances are  sure  to  start  up  and  hinder  him  from  the  recognition. 
But  surely,  in  the  case  of  John,  the  lowliness  of  mind  and  sobriety  of 
judgment  to  which  we  have  just  referred  give  us  ground  to  expect 
that  he,  at  least,  would  so  far  surmount  his  peculiar  prejudices  as  to 
recognize  the  admission  of  a  higher  element  into  the  course  of  events 
— to  recognize  a  stand-point  even  essentially  different  from  his  own  ; 
especially  as  he  had  himself  pointed  out  beforehand  the  characteristics 
of  such  a  difference.  Yet  we  do  not  wish  to  deny  that  doubts  may 
arise,  in  regard  to  the^ac^  of  John's  recognition  of  Jesus  as  Messiah. 


56  JOHN  THE  BAPTIST. 

ill  the  minds  of  those  who  do  not  presuppose  the  unconditional  credi- 
bility of  the  Gospels.  Perhajjs  the  remark  above  made,  in  reference 
to  a  possible  commingling  of  the  subjective  and  the  objective  in  the 
Gospel  accounts,  may  be  applicable  here.  But  before  vve  proceed 
with  our  connected  historical  recital,  we  must  seek  sure  historical  foot- 
ing, by  inquiring  into  the  grounds  of  tlie  doubts  refo«'red  to. 

The  following  questions,  perhaps,  express  these  grounds  :  If  John 
was  really  convinced  of  Christ's  Messiahship,  why  did  he  contiime  his 
independent  ministry,  and  not  rather  submit  himself  and  all  his  follow- 
ers as  disciples  to  Christ  ?  Why  did  he  wait  until  after  his  imprison- 
ment before  sending  to  inquire  of  Jesus  whether  he  were  the  Messiah, 
or  men  should  look  for  another  1  Why,  even  after  the  Baptist's  death, 
did  his  disciples  preserve  their  separate  existence  as  a  secti  How 
happened  it  that,  in  a  public  proclamation  of  the  Gospel  (Acts,  x.,  37  ; 
xiii.,  25),  no  stress  is  laid  upon  John's  divinely  inspired  testimony  con- 
cerning Christ — nay,  it  is  not  even  quoted — while  his  exhortations  to 
repentance  and  his  announcement  of  the  coming  Messiah  are  dwelt 
upon,  as  the  preparation  for  Christ's  public  ministry  ?  Do  not  these 
difficulties  make  it  doubtful  whether  John  really  did,  before  the  time 
of  his  imprisonment,  recognize  Christ's  Messiahship  1  Or,  is  it  not 
probable  that  the  Christian  view,  which  sees  in  Christ  the  kpxofievog 
announced  by  John,  was  involuntarily  attributed  to  the  Baptist,  and  so 
the  tradition  grew  up  that  he  had  personally  recognized  the  Messiah- 
ship  of  Jesus,  and  introduced  him  into  his  public  labours  %  In  this  case 
we  should  have  to  admit  that  he  was  first  induced,  while  in  prison,  by 
what  he  heard  of  Christ,  to  recognize  his  calling — and  that  not  only  had 
this  fact  been  transferred  to  an  earlier  period  in  his  history,  but  too 
much  made  of  it  altogether. 

Now  it  would  be  easy  to  overthrow  this  whole  structure  at  once,  by 
assuming  the  genuineness  and  authority  of  John's  Gospel.*  It  is  true, 
as  has  been  before  said,  the  disciple,  after  going  beyond  his  Master, 
might  have  seen  more  in  the  previously  uttered  words  of  the  latter 
than  he  himself  had  intended ;  but,  at  any  rate,  those  words  must  at 
least  have  afforded  some  ground  for  the  disciple's  representation.  If 
the  above-mentioned  doubts  are  well  grounded,  John's  misrepi'esenta- 
tion  of  what  occurred  between  the  Baptist  and  Christ  is  nothing  short 
of  wilful  falsehood.  The  later  Christian  traditions,  indeed,  miglit  have 
admitted  such  a  transposition  without  the  intent  to  deceive ;  but  John 
was  an  ei/e-witness.  We  do  not  intend,  however,  to  appeal  to  John's 
authority,  but  shall  examine  the  matter  on  internal  evidence,  grounded 
on  the  nature  of  the  case. 

*  John,  i.,  7,  15  ;  iii.,  32  ;  v.,  33. 


HIS  RELATION  TO  CHRIST.  57 

(1.)  Import  of  the  Baptism  of  Jesiis  by  John. 
We  first  consider  the  baptism  of  Jesus  by  John.  Those  who  carry 
their  doubts  of  John's  testimony  farthest,  dispute  even  the  fact  of  this 
baptism.  But  this  is  absolutely  groundless  skepticism  ;  for  all  the  New 
Testament  accounts,  however  else  they  may  differ,  presuppose  the 
event  as  a  fact.  It  would  be  impossible  to  account  even  for  the  orirrin 
of  such  a  tradition,  if  the  event  itself  did  not  originate  it ;  the  very  ap- 
plication of  John's  baptism  to  the  sinless  Jesus  must  have  caused  diffi- 
culties to  the  Christian  mind,  which  a  peculiar  line  of  thouo-ht  alone 
could  remove.  But,  admitting  the  fact,  it  cannot  be  supposed  that 
Christ  submitted  to  the  baptism  in  the  same  sense,  and  for  the  same 
purpose,  as  others  did  ;  for  we  can  find  no  possible  connectino-  link 
between  the  sense  of  sin  and  the  desire  for  purification  and  redemption 
felt  by  all  ordinary  applicants  for  the  ordinance,  and  the  consciousness 
of  the  sinless  Redeemer.  It  was  with  this  latter,  unoriginated  con- 
sciousness, however,  that  Jesus  presented  himself  for  baptism.  But 
we  cannot  suppose  that  he  did  it  in  silence ;  such  a  course  might  have 
led  the  Baptist,  if  not  otherwise  enlightened,  to  su2:»pose  that  he  came 
forward  in  the  same  relation  to  the  ordinance  as  other  men.  Its  prob- 
ability is  diminished,  too,  in  proportion  to  our  idea  of  John's  suscepti- 
bility for  the  disclosures  which  Christ  might  have  made  to  him.  We 
are  led,  therefore,  by  the  internal  necessity  of  the  case,  to  suppose  that, 
in  administering  the  baptism,  he  received  a  higher  light  in  regard  to  the 
relation  which  he  himself  sustained  to  Christ. 

(2.)  The  Baptist's  continuauce  in  his  Ministiy  of  Preparation. 
We  must  conclude,  however,  that  if  John  did  recognize  Jesus  as 
Messiah,  he  applied  to  him  all  his  Old-Testament  ideas  of  Messiah  as 
the  founder  of  a  visible  kingdom.  With  these  views  he  would  expect 
that  Christ  would  bring  about  the  public  recognition  of  his  office  by 
his  own  Messianic  labours,  without  the  aid  of  his  testimony.  This  ex- 
pectation would  naturally  cause  him  to  forbear  any  public  testimony 
to  Christ,  and  to  content  himself  with  directing  only  a  few  of  the  most 
susceptible  of  his  disciples  to  the  Saviour ;  but  this  would  have  been 
a  merely  private  affiiir,  forming  no  part  of  his  open  mission  to  the 
Avorld.  That  mission  remained  always  the  same,  viz.,  to  prepare  the 
way  for  the  INIessiah's  kingdom,  and  to  point  to  Him  who  was  soon  to 
reveal  himself;  tiot  to  anticipate  his  self-revelation,  and  to  declare  him 
to  the  people  hi/  name  as  the  Messiah.  This  preparatory  position  of 
.Tohn  had  to  continue  until  the  time  when  the  entrance  of  Jesus  as 
Theocratic  King,  upon  the  establishment  of  his  kingdom,  gave  the  sig- 
nal for  all  to  range  themselves  under  his  banners.  The  Baptist,  true 
to  the  position  that  had  been  assigned  to  him  in  the  Theocratic  devel- 


58  JOHN  THE  BAPTIST. 

opement,  had  to  continue  his  labours  until  their  termination,  a  termina- 
tion which  external  circumstances  were  soon  to  bring  about.*  As, 
therefore,  John's  testimony  was  merely  private,  and  never  openly  laid 
before  the  people  ;  and,  moreover,  as  its  value  depended  entirely  upon 
the  recognition  of  John's  own  projihetic  calling  (a  recognition  by  no 
means  universal  among  the  Jews),  there  is  no  difficulty  in  accounting 
for  the  fact  that  so  little  use  was  made  of  his  testimony  in  the  citation 
of  proofs  for  Jesus's  Messiahship  by  Peter  and  Paul,  in  the  passages 
above  referred  to.t 

(3.)  Possible  Wavering  in  John's  Conviction  of  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus. 

Suppose,  now,  that  John's  faith  did  waver  in  his  prison — that,  in  an 
unhappy  hour,  he  was  seized  with  doubts  of  Christ's  Messiahship — 
would  it  follow  that  he  had  not  before  enjoyed  and  expressed  with  Di- 
vine confidence  his  conviction  of  the  truth  1  Would  the  later  doubt 
suffice  to  do  avvay  with  the  earlier  and  out-spoken  certainty'?  Can  the 
man  who  makes  such  an  assertion  have  any  idea  of  the  nature  and  de- 
velopement  of  religious  conviction  and  knowledge — of  the  relation  be- 
tween the  Divine,  the  supernatural,  and  the  natural?  It  is  true  that 
scientific  knowledge  and  conviction,  logically  obtained,  can  never  be 
lost  so  long  as  the  intellect  remains  unimpaired  ;  but  it  is  quite  another 
thing  with  religious  truths.  These  do  not  grow  out  of  logic ;  but,  pre- 
supposing certain  spiritual  tendencies  and  affections,  they  arise  from  an 
immediate  contact  of  the  soul  with  God,  from  a  beam  of  God's  liffht, 
penetrating  the  mind  that  is  allied  to  him.  The  knowledge  and  the 
convictions  which  are  drawn  neither  from  natural  reason  nor  from  the 
knowledge  of  the  world,  but  are  always  rebelled  against  by  the  latter 
until  the  whole  spirit  is  penetrated  by  the  Divine,  can  retain  their  vi- 
tality only  by  the  same  going  forth  of  the  higher  life  which  gave  them 

*  I  am  gratified  to  find  that  Winer,  one  of  the  most  eminent  investigators  of  Biblical 
literature,  has  given  an  intimation  of  the  view  which  I  have  here  fully  carried  out.  Sec 
his  "Biblisches  E,ealw6rterbiich,"  i.,  C92,  2d  ed. 

t  Acts,  X.,  37  ;  xiii.,  25.  Paul  bad  much  more  occasion  to  quote  John's  testimony  when 
preaching  to  his  disciples  at  Ephesus  (Acts,  xix.,  1-5).  There  is  no  ground  for  asserting 
jiositivcly  that  he  did  not  quote  it,  although  the  passage  does  not  state  expressly  that  he 
did ;  for  it  remains  doubtful  whether  the  words  tovt'  lariv,  of  verse  4,  are  applied  by  PanI 
to  the  ^pxiAftTOt  announced  by  John,  or  were  intended  by  him  to  be  attributed  to  tbe  Baptist. 
What  is  said  of  Apollos  (Acts,  xviii.,  25  :  he  was  instructed  in  the  way  of  the  Lord,  knou-insc 
onhj  thr  baptism  nf  John]  cpnnot  be  understood  nakedly  of  the  pure,  sjiiritual  Messiahsliii). 
This  could  only  be  the  case  if  Wo;  tov  Kvpiov  (v.  25)  were  equivalent  to  Ocoi/  o^ov  (v.  Hi),  and 
signified  merely  the  way  revealed  by  God,  the  right  way  of  worshipping  God.  But  this 
cannot  be.  Tlic  word  nvpios  mnst  be  taken  in  its  specific,  Cliristian  sense,  as  ajjplicable  to 
Cbri.st;  an  interpretation  ccjnfimiod  by  wliat  follows,  viz.  :  he  taught  diligently  the  things 
oj  the  Ijjrd,  which  cannot  refer  to  the  doctrine  of  God,  but  to  the  proclamation  of  Jesus  as 
Messiah.  But  if  it  could  be  fully  proved  that  all  these  disci|)les  of  John  knew  as  yet  no- 
thing of  Jesus  as  the  ip\niievos  announced  by  the  Baptist,  it  would  not  affect  our  assertion 
at  all ;  for  we  have  already  admitted  that  tbe  latter  only  partially  directed  his  followers  to 
Christ  as  Messiah. 


HIS  RELATION  TO  CHRIST.  59 

birth  ;  only  so  fav  as  the  soul  can  maintain  itself  in  the  same  atmo- 
sphere, and  in  the  same  tendency  to  the  supernatural  and  the  Divine. 
So  one  may,  when  in  the  full  enjoyment  of  the  higher  life,  when  no 
vapours  of  earth  dim  his  spiritual  vision,  have  clear  conception  and  con- 
viction of  religious  truths,  which  may  perplex  him  with  obscurities  at 
times  when  the  earthly  tendencies  prevail.  And  thus  we  may  explain 
the  fluctuations  and  transitions  in  the  developement  of  religious  life, 
convictions  and  knowledge,  of  which  the  experience  of  Christians  in  all 
ages  aff'ords  instances.  It  may  be  said  that,  although  this  explanation 
holds  good  of  religious  life  in  general,  it  cannot  apply  to  an  inspired 
prophet  like  John,  or  to  the  truths  which  he  obtained  from  the  light  of 
a  supernatural  revelation.  This  objection  would  imply  that  a  single 
objective  revelation  is  the  only  source  of  Christian  truth,  which  is  not 
the  case.  The  apprehension  of  such  truths  in  every  individual  mind 
rests  not  merely  upon  this  single  objective  ground,  but  also  upon  a 
repetition  of  the  Divine  manifestation  to  the  mind  itself.  The  differ- 
ence between  the  inspired  prophet  and  the  ordinary  Christian  believer, 
in  regard  to  the  reception  of  God's  truth,  is  not  a  difference  in  Icind, 
but  in  degree.  Christ  declared  that  the  least  of  Christians  was  greater 
than  John  ;  words  that  ill  entitle  us  to  draw  such  a  line  of  distinction 
between  the  Baptist  and  living  Christians  of  all  ages  as  to  apply  another 
standard  and  another  law  to  his  religious  life.  It  is  true,  there  is  a  life- 
less supernaturalism  which  views  all  Divine  communications  rather  as 
overlying  the  mind  than  incorporating  themselves  with  its  natural  psy- 
chological developement;  and  the  opponents  of  revealed  religion  cari- 
cature this  view  to  serve  their  purpose  of  subverting  the  doctrines  they 
so  bitterly  hate.  But  notwithstanding,  the  doctrine  of  such  Divine  com- 
munication is  perfectly  in  accordance  with  the  facts  of  the  Divine  life 
as  they  are  stated  in  the  Scriptures  ;  and  we  are  compelled  thereby  to 
connect  these  manifestations  with  the  natural  growth  of  the  mind  in  its 
receptive  powers  and  spontaneous  activity ;  to  apply  the  general  laws 
of  the  mind  to  the  developement  of  whatever  is  communicated  to  it  by 
a  higher  light. 

As  we  have  before  remarked,  John  stood  between  two  different 
stages  of  the  developement  of  the  Theocracy.  It  is,  therefore,  not  un- 
likely that  in  times  of  the  fullest  religious  inspiration,  caused  in  his 
soul  by  Christ's  revelations  to  him,  he  obtained  views  of  the  coming 
kingdom  which  he  could  not  always  hold  fast,  and  his  old  ideas  some- 
times revived  and  even  gained  the  ascendency.  Although  he  had  just 
conceptions  of  Messiah's  kingdom  in  regard  to  its  moral  and  religious 
ends,  he  was  always  inclined  to  connect  worldly  ideas  with  it.  But  the 
object  of  his  hopes  was  not  realized.  He  heard,  indeed,  a  great  deal 
about  the  miracles  of  Jesus,  but  saw  him  not  at  the  head  of  his  visible 
kingdom.     The  signal  so  long  waited  for  was  never  given.     Is  it,  there- 


60  JOHN  THE  BAPTIST. 

fore,  matter  of  wonder  if,  in  some  hour  of  despondency,  the  worldly 
element  in  the  Baptist's  views  became  too  strong,  and  perplexity  and 
doubt  arose  within  him  1 

(4.)  The  Message  from  Prison. 

The  inquiry  which  John  sent  to  the  Saviour  from  prison*  shows  that 
his  doubts  did  not  refer  at  all  to  the  superiority  of  Christ,  but  to  the 
question  whether  the  mission  of  the  latter  was  the  Messiahship  itself, 
or  only  a  preparation  for  it.  So  great  was  his  respect  for  the  author- 
ity of  Christ,  that  he  expected  the  decisive  answer  to  the  question  from 
his  own  lips.  Neither  the  form  of  the  question  nor  the  Saviour's  reply 
favour  the  supposition' that  John  was  led,  simply  by  the  reports  of 
Christ's  labours  which  had  reached  him  in  prison,  to  the  thought  that 
he  might  be  the  epxofievog.  Had  this  been  the  case,  Christ  would  have 
answered  him  as  he  did  others  in  similar  circumstances ;  he  would  not 
have  warned  him  not  to  be  perplexed  or  offended  because  his  ground- 
less expectations  in  regard  to  the  Messiah  were  not  fully  realized  in 
Christ's  ministry,  but,  on  the  contrary,  would  have  cherished  a  faith, 
which  could  grow  up  in  one  who  was  languishing  in  prison,  and  unable 
to  see  with  his  own  eyes  the  mighty  works  that  were  done,  and  would 
have  encouraged  him  to  yield  himself  fully  up  to  the  dawning  convic- 
tion. The  warning  against  OKavdaAL(^eadat  was  precisely  applicable  to 
one  who  had  once  believed,  but  whose  faith  had  wavered  because  his 
hopes  were  not  fully  fulfilled.  The  answer  of  Jesus,  moreover,  shows 
plainly  in  what  expectations  John  was  disappointed  :  they  were,  as  we 
^all  have  occasion  to  show  hereafter,  such  as  grew  out  of  his  Old 
Testament  stand-point,  and  attributed  an  outward  character  to  the 
kingdom  of  God. 

(5.)  Coiuluct  of  Joliu's  Disciples  towards  Jesus. 

It  does  not  militate  at  all  against  our  position,  in  regard  to  the  Bap- 
tist's recognition  of  Christ,  that  many  of  his  disciples  did  not  join  the 
Saviour  at  a  later  period  ;  and  even  that  a  sect  was  formed  from  them 
hostile  to  Christianity.  We  have  already  seen  that  it  was  necessaiy  for 
John  to  maintain  his  independent  sphere  of  labour,  and  that  his  position 
naturally  led  him  to  direct  only  the  more  susceptible  of  his  disciples 
to  Jesus,  and  that  too  by  degrees.  These  latter  were  probably  such 
as  had  imbibed  more  of  John's  longing  desire  for  *'  him  that  was  to 
come,"  than  of  the  austere  and  ascetic  spirit  of  the  sect.  As  to  the 
rest,  we  have  only  to  say  that  we  have  no  right  to  judge  the  master  by 
his  scholars,  or  the  scholars  by  their  master.  Men  who  hold  a  position 
preparatory  and  conducive  to  a  higher  one,  often  retain  the  peculiar 
and  one-sided  views  of  their  old  ground,  and  are  even  driven  into  an 

*  Matt.,  xi.,  2,  3. 


HIS  RELATION  TO  CHRIST.  61 

attitude  of  opposition  to  the  new  and  the  better.     This  seems  to  have 
been  the  case  with  John's  disciples  in  relation  to  Christianity. 

From  this  full  investigation  of  the  question,  we  cannot  but  conclude 
that  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  the  historical  veracity  of  the  narrative. 
It  is  matter  oi  fact,  that  John  openly  recognized  Jesus  as  the  Messiah 
when  he  baptized  him.  Having  secured  this  firm  historical  basis,  we 
proceed  now,  with  the  greater  confidence,  to  inquire  into  the  peculiar 
import  of  the  baptism  itself. 

§  42.    TJie  Phenomena  at  the  Baptism,  and  their  Import. 

(1.)  No  Ecstatic  Vision. — (2.)  The  Ebionitieli  Vievsr  and  its  Opposite. — (3.)  Devel- 
opement  of  the  Notion  of  Baptism  in  New  Testament. — (4.)  The  Baptism  of  Christ 
not  a  Rite  of  rurificatiou. — (5.)  But  of  Consecration  to  his  Theoci-atic  Reign. — 
(6.)  John's  previous  Acquaintance  with  Clirist. — (7.)  Explanation  of  Jolm,  i.,  31. — 
(8.)  The  "Viision  and  the  Voice;  intended  exclusively  for  the  Baptist. 

Two  questions  present  themselves  here  :  the  bearing  of  the  baptism 
upon  John,  and  its  bearing  upon  Christ.  The  first  can  easily  be  gath- 
ered from  what  has  been  said  already,  and  from  the  concurrent  ac- 
counts of  the  Evangelists.  It  is  clear  that  John  was  to  be  enlightened, 
by  a  sign  from  heaven,  in  regard  to  the  person  who  was  to  be  the 
ipxonsvog  whom  he  himself  had  unconsciously  foretold.  The  second, 
however,  is  not  so  easy  to  answer.  The  accounts  do  not  harmonize  so 
well  with  each  other  on  this  point,  nor  are  all  men  agreed  in  their 
opinions  of  the  person  of  Christ ;  and  these  causes  have  given  rise  to 
several  different  solutions  of  the  question. 

The  point  to  be  settled  is  this  :  Was  the  Divine  revelation  made  on 
this  occasion  intended,  though  in  different  relations,  for  both  John  and 
Christ ;  not  merely  to  give  the  former  certainty  as  to  the  person  of 
Messiah,  but  to  impart  a  firm  consciousness  of  INIessiahship  to  the  lat- 
ter ]  And  did  Jesus,  thus  for  the  first  time  obtaining  this  full  con- 
sciousness, at  the  same  moment  receive  the  powers  essential  to  his 
Messianic  mission  ]  Did  what  John's  eyes  beheld  take  place  really 
and  objectively,  and  the  fulness  of  the  Holy  Ghost  descend  upon  Je- 
sus to  fit  him  for  his  mighty  work  1 

(1.)  No  Ecstatic  Vision  to  be  supposed  in  the  case  of  Christ. 

If  we  adopt  this  latter  view,  we  must  look  at  all  the  j^henomena  con- 
nected with  the  baptism,  not  as  merely  subjective  conceptions,  but  as 
objective  su-pevnatura] /acts.  It  is  true,  we  may  imagine  a  symbolical 
vision  to  have  been  the  medium  of  a  Divine  revelation  common  to 
Christ  and  John  ;  but  we  must  certainly  be  permitted  to  doubt  the  ap- 
plication of  such  a  mode  of  revelation  to  Christ.  It  may  be  granted 
that  the  Prophets  were  sometimes,  in  ecstatic  vision,  carried  beyond 


62  JOHN  THE  BAPTIST. 

themselves  and  overwhelmed  by  a  higher  power:  but  in  these  instances 
there  is  an  abrupt  suddenness,  an  opposition  of  the  human  and  the 
Divine ;  a  leap,  so  to  speak,  in  the  developement  of  consciousness, 
which  we  could  hardly  imagine  in  connexion  with  the  specific  and  dis- 
tinctive nature  of  the  person  of  Christ.  Nor,  in  fact,  is  there  a  hint  at 
such  a  possibility  in  the  Gospel  narratives, 

(2.)  Ebiouitish  Views  of  the  Miracle  at  the  Baptism,  and  its  Ojiposite. 

There  are  two  opposite  stand-points  which  agree  in  ascribing  to  the 
events  of  the  baptism  the  greatest  importance  in  reference  to  Christ's 
Messiahship.  The  first  is  that  of  the  Ehivnites,  who  deny  Christ's  spe- 
cific Divinity.  It  is,  that  he  not  only  received  from  without,  at  a  definite 
period  of  his  life,  the  consciousness  of  his  Divine  mission,  but  also  the 
powers  necessary  to  its  accomplishment.  The  other  view  (proceeding, 
however,  from  firm  believers  in  the  divinity  of  Christ)  supposes  that  the 
Divine  Logos,  in  assuming  the  form  of  humanity,  submitted,  by  this 
act  of  self-renunciation,  to  all  the  laws  of  human  developement;  and 
further,  that  when  Christ  passed  from  the  sphere  of  private  life  to  that 
of  his  public  ministry,  he  was  set  apart  and  j^repared  for  it  as  the  proph- 
ets were ;  with  this  single  element  of  superiority,  viz.,  that  he  was 
endowed  with  i\\e fulness  of  tlie  Holy  Ghost. 

As  for  the  first  view,  it  is  not  only  at  variance  with  the  whole  char- 
acter of  Christ's  manifestation,  but  also  with  all  his  own  testimonies 
of  himself.  In  all  these  there  is  manifested  the  consciousness  of  his 
own  greatness,  not  as  something  acquired,  but  as  unoriginated,  and  in- 
separable from  his  being.  He  does  not  sjieak  like  one  who  has  be- 
come what  he  is  by  some  sudden  revolution.  In  short,  this  whole  mode 
of  thinking  springs  from  an  outward  supernaturalism,  which  represents 
the  Divine  as  antagonist  to  the  human,  and  imposes  it  upon  Christ  from 
without;  instead  of  considering  his  entire  manifestation  from  the  be- 
ginning as  Divine  and  supernatural,  of  deriving  every  thing  from  this 
fundamental  ground,  and  recognizing  in  it  the  aim  of  all  the  special 
revelations  of  the  old  dispensation.  This  is  a  continuation  of  the  old 
.Tcwiah  view  of  the  progress  of  the  Theocracy  :  all  is  fonned  from 
without,  instead  of  developing  itself  organically  from  within  ;  the  Di- 
vine is  an  abrupt  exhibition  of  the  supernatural.  How  opposite  to  this 
is  the  view  which  sees  in  the  human,  the  form  of  manifestation  under 
which  the  Divine  nature  has  revealed  itself  from  the  beginning,  and 
perceives,  in  this  original  and  thorough  inlerpenctration  of  the  Divine 
and  the  human,  the  aim  and  the  culmination  of  all  miracles. 

The  second  view  above  mentioned  will  apjiear  the  most  simple  and 
natural,  if,  instead  of  considering  a  Divine  communication  from  with- 


THE  BAPTISM  OF  CHRIST.  63 

out  to  have  been  made  necessary  by  the  self-renunciation  of  the  Logos 
in  assuming  human  form,  we  admit  a  gradual  revelation  (in  accordauce 
with  the  laws  of  human  c]^velopement)  of  the  Divine  nature,  potentially 
present,  as  the  ground  of  the  incarnate  being,  from  the  very  first,  and 
trace  all  that  appears  in  the  outward  manifestation  to  the  process  of 
developement  from  within.  In  the  lives  of  all  other  reformers,  or 
founders  of  religions,  whose  call  seems  to  have  dated  from  a  certain 
period  of  life,  the  biith-time,  as  it  were,  of  their  activity,  it  is  impossi- 
ble not  to  trace,  in  their  later  labours  and  in  their  own  personal  state- 
ments, some  references  to  the  eai'lier  period  when  their  call  was  un- 
felt,*  In  the  discourses  of  Christ,  however  there  is  not  the  most  dis- 
tant approach  to  such  an  allusion. 

(3.)  Different  Steps  in  the  New  Testament  Notion  of  tlie  Baptism,  up  to  that  of 
John  the  Evangelist. 

In  the  revelations  of  the  New  Testament,  and  in  the  process  of  the 
developement  of  Christianity  which  those  revelations  unfold,  we  can  dis- 
tinguish various  steps,  or  stages,  of  progress  from  the  Old  Testament 
ideas  to  the  New.  Especially  is  this  the  case  in  regard  to  the  person 
of  Christ.  The  conception  of  Christ,  as  anointed  with  the  fullness  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  and  superior  to  all  other  prophets,  is  akin  to  Old  Tes- 
tament ideas,  and  forms  the  point  of  transition  to  the  New,  which  rest 
upon  the  manifestation  of  Christ.  But  it  requii'ed  a  completely  devel- 
oped Christian  consciousness  to  recognize,  in  his  appearance  on  earth, 
the  Divine  glory  as  inherent  in  him  from  the  beginning,  and  progres- 
sive only  so  far  as  its  outward  manifestation  was  concerned.  These 
two  views,  however,  by  no  means  exclude  each  other ;  the  one  is  rather 
the  complement  of  the  other,  while  both,  at  a  different  stage  of  devel- 
opement, tend  to  one  and  the  same  definite  aim.  And  the  latter,  or 
highest  stage  of  Christian  consciousness,  we  are  naturally  to  look  for 
in  that  beloved  apostle  who  enjoyed  the  closest  degree  of  intimacy 
with  Christ,  and  was,  on  that  account,  best  of  all  able  to  understand 
profoundly  both  his  manifestation  and  his  discourses.  From  John,  too, 
we  must  expect  the  highest  Christian  view  of  the  person  of  Christ. 
[The  account  of  the  principal  event  of  the  baptism  is  thus  given  in 
John's  Gospel :  "  And  John  bare  record,  saying,  I  saw  the  Spirit  de- 
scending from  heaven  like  a  dove,  and  it  abode  upon  him.  And  I  knew 
him  not ;  but  he  that  sent  me  to  baptize  with  water,  the  same  said  unto  me^ 
Upon  whom  thou  shalt  see  the  Spirit  descending,  and  remaining  on  him, 
the  same  is  he  which  baptizeth  with  the  Holy  Ghost.  And  Isaiv  and  bare 
record  that  this  is  the  Son  o/'GoD."t]     Now  the  fact  thus  stated,  if  in- 

*  As  in  Luther  we  see  frequent  references  to  the  hght  which  first  broke  upon  his  mind 
during  his  monastic  life  at  Erfurth,  an  epoch  of  the  utmost  moment  to  his  after  career  as  a 
refoi-mer.  t  John,  1.,  32-34. 


64  JOHN  THE  BAPTIST. 

terpreted  in  an  outward  and  material  sense,  and  combined  with  the 
view  of  Christ  which  we  mentioned  a  while  ago  as  akin  to  the  Jewish 
ideas,  might  easily  give  rise  to  the  doctrine  that  Christ  obtained  at  the 
baptism  something  which  he  had  not  possessed  before. 

Our  conclusion  is,  that  Christ  was  already  sure  of  his  Divine  call  to 
the  Messiahsliip,  and  submitted  himself,  in  the  coui'se  of  the  Theocratic 
developement,  to  baptism,  as  a  preparative  and  inaugural  rite,  from  the 
hands  of  the  man  who  was  destined  to  conduct  prophecy  to  its  fulfil- 
ment, and  to  be  the  first  to  recognize,  by  light  from  heaven,  the  mani- 
fested Messiah.  •       - 

(4.)  The  Baptism  not  a  Rite  of  Purification. 

The  idea  that  Christ  was  baptized  with  a  view  to  purification  is  ab- 
solutely untenable,  no  matter  how  the  notion  of  purification  may  be 
modified.  Akin  to  this  idea,  certainly,  is  the  view  held  by  some,*  that 
he  submitted  to  this  act  of  self-humiliation  in  the  same  sense  in  which 
he  humbled  himself  before  God,  as  the  One  alone  to  be  called  good.t 
This  view  would  suppose  him  conscious,  not  of  actual  sin,  but  of  a  dor- 
mant possibility  of  sin,  inherent  in  his  finite  nature  and  his  human  or- 
ganism, always  restrained,  however,  by  the  steadfast  firmness  of  his 
will,  from  passing  into  action.  But  if  we  suppose  in  Christ  the  abstract 
possibility  to  sin|  which  is  inseparable  from  a  created  will,  pure  but 
not  yet  immutable — such  a  capability  as  we  attribute  to  the  first  man 
before  the  fall — even  this  would  not  necessarily  connect  with  itself  a 
dormant,  hidden  sinfulness,  involving  in  him  a  conscious  need  of  purifi- 
cation in  any  sense  whatever.  Such  a  consciousness  can  grow  only  out 
of  a  sense  of  inherent  moral  defilement,  by  no  means  originally  belong- 
ing to  the  conception  of  a  created  being,  or  of  human  nature.  We 
cannot  admit  a  dormant  principle  of  sin  as  an  essential  element  of  the 
moral  developement  of  man's  original  being.  Sin  is  an  act  of  free  will, 
and  cannot  be  derived  from  any  other  source,  or  explained  in  any  other 
way.§  There  is,  then,  in  Christ's  humbling  himself,  in  his  human  capaci- 
ty, befin-e  God,  the  only  Good,  no  trace  of  that  sense  of  need  and  want 
with  which  the  sinner,  conscious  of  guilt,  bows  himself  before  the  Holy 
One.  The  act  manifested  only  a  sense,  deeply  grounded  in  his  holy, 
sinless  nature,  of  absolute  dependence  upon  the  Source  of  all  good. 


*  De.  Welle,  on  Matt.,  iii.,  IC.  Conf.  his  Sitlenlrhre,  §  4!),  T>0  ;  and  Stray  as,  too,  aftci-lic  had 
Been  that  the  view  formerly  expressed  l»y  him  was  untenable  (1.  c.,  435,  433). 

t  Matt.,  xix.,  17. 

I  This  is  not  tlie  place  to  examine  the  old  controvcrsj'  whether  Christ's  sinlcssnoss  is  to 
be  rei^arded  as  a  posur  nnn  peccare  or  a  non  posse  peccare. 

^  We  cannot  enter  further  into  this  subject  here,  but  take  pleasure  in  refemntf  our  read- 
ers to  the  late  excellent  work  of  J.  Miiller,  viz.,  "Die  Lehre  von  der  Siinde,"  in  wliich  the 
subject  is  treated  witli  remarkable  depth  and  clearness.  The  new  elucidations  in  tlie  2d 
edition,  especially,  evince  a  soundness  of  mind  that  is  not  more  rare  than  excellent. 


THE  BAPTISM  OF  CHRIST.  65 

(5.)  The  Baptism  of  Christ  a  Rite  of  Congecration  to  his  Theocratic  Reign. 
All  difficulties  are  cleared  away  by  considering  John's  baptism  as  a 
rite  of  prejiaration  and  consecration,  first  in  its  application  to  tlie  mem- 
bers of  the  Theocratic  kingdom,  and  secondly  to  its  Founder  and  Sov- 
ereign. The  repentance  and  the  sense  of  sin  which  were  essential 
preliminaries  to  the  baptism  of  the  former,  could  in  no  way  belong  to 
Him  who,  at  the  very  moment  when  the  rite  was  administered,  reveal- 
ed himself  to  the  Baptist  as  the  Messiah,  the  deliverer  from  sin.  But 
while  the  import  of  the  rite  thus  varied  with  the  subjects  to  whom  it 
was  administered,  there  was,  at  bottom,  a  substantial  element  which 
they  shared  in  common.  In  both  it  marked  the  commencement  of  a 
new  course  of  life ;  but,  in  the  members,  this  new  life  was  to  be  re- 
ceived from  without  through  communications  from  on  high  :  while  in 
Christ  it  ,was  to  consist  of  a  gradual  unfolding  from  within  ;  in  the  for- 
mer it  was  to  be  receptive ;  in  the  latter  productive.  In  a  word,  the 
baptism  of  the  members  prepared  them  to  rccewe  pardon  and  salvation  ; 
that  of  Christ  was  his  consecration  to  the  work  of  bestotving  those 
precious  gifts. 

(6.)  Had  John  a  previous  Acquaintance  with  Clirist? 

If  the  Baptist  had  an  earlier  acquaintance  with  Jesus,  he  could  not 
have  failed,  with  his  susceptible  feelings,  to  receive  a  deeper  impression 
of  his  divinity  than  other  men.  We  cannot  but  infer,  from  Luke's* 
statement  (chap,  i.)  of  the  relationshipf  between  the  two  families,  that 

*  The  Apocryphal  Gospels  contain  many  fables  in  regard  to  Mary's  descent  from  a 
priestly  lineage,  arising,  perhaps,  from  the  fact  that  the  Messiah  was  to  be  both  high-priest 
and  king.  (So  in  the  second  Testament  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs,  the  Testament  of  Simeon, 
§  7  :  avnar^ati  Kvpws  cK  toiv  Acvi  apxicpia  Ka]  iK  Tail'  'loviu  jjaaiXia,  both  in  the  person  of  the  Mes- 
siah.) There  is  nothing  akin  to  these  in  Luke's  account  of  the  relationship  between  Marj' 
and  Elizabeth,  the  latter  being  of  priestly  lineage,  which  is  only  given  e?t  passant ;  the 
stress  is  laid  upon  the  descent  from  David's  line. 

t  Matthew's  omission  to  mention  this  relationship  and  to  give  any  reason  for  Jolm's  re- 
luctance to  baptize  Christ,  only  proves  his  narrative  to  he  more  artless,  and  therefore  more 
credible.  The  Ebionitish  Gospel  to  the  Hebrews  shows  far  greater  marks  of  design,  and, 
indeed,  of  an  alteration  for  a  set  purpose.  It  represents  the  miraculous  appearances  as 
preceding  and  causing  John's  conduct. — When  John  hears  the  voice  from  heaven,  and  sees 
the  miraculous  light,  he  inquires,  Wlw  art  thou  7  A  second  voice  is  heard  to  reply.  This 
is  my  hcloved  Son,  in  whom  I  am  well  pleased.  John  is  thereby  led  to  fall  at  his  feet  and 
cry,-  Baptize  thou  me.  Christ,  refusing  him,  says,  Svffcr  it. — Here  not  only  are  the  phe- 
nomena exaggerated,  but  the  facts  are  remodelled  to  suit  Ebionitish  views,  which  denied 
the  miraculous  events  at  Chiist's  birth,  and  demanded  that  the  sudden  change  by  which  he 
was  called  and  fitted  for  the  Messiahship  at  the  moment  of  baptism  should  be  made  prom- 
inent by  contrast  with  all  tliat  had  gone  before.  They  conceived,  accordingly,  that  he  first 
received  the  Holy  Ghost  when  it  descended  upon  him  in  the  fonn  of  a  dove,  and  that  at 
that  period  he  was  endowed  with  a  new  dignity,  and  must  offer  new  manifestations.  Hie 
divine  character  was  thus  obtained  in  a  sudden,  magical  way  ;  and  the  two  periods  of  his 
life,  before  and  after  that  event,  were  brought  into  clear  and  sharp  conti'ast:  every  thing 
that  occuiTcd  at  the  baptism  was  deemed  miraculous,  while  all  the  wonders  of  his  pre%'ious 

E 


66  JOHN  THE  BAPTIST. 

he  had  heard  of  the  extraordinary  cu-cumstances  attending  the  birth  of 
Jesus.  The  Saviour  "prayed"  at  the  baptism  (Luke,  iii.,  21).  If  we 
figure  to  ourselves  his  countenance,  foil  of  holy  devotion  and  heavenly 
repose,  as  he  stood  in  prayer,  and  ita  sudden  association,  in  the  mind 
of  the  Baptist,  with  all  his  recollections  of  tke  eaily  history  of  Jesus,  we 
cannot  wonder  that  the  humble  man  of  God^— all  aware  as  he  was  that 
the  Messiah  was  to  be  consecrated  by  his  baptism — should  have  been 
overwhelmed,  in  that  hour  so  pregnant  with  mighty  interests,  with 
a  sense  of  his  own  comparative  unworthiness,  ai>d  cried,  "  /  have  need 
to  he  baptized  of  thee,  and  earnest  thou  to  me  .?" 

(7.)  Explanation  of  John,  i.,  31. 

One  of  two  things  must  be  true :  either  John  baptized  Christ  with 
sole  and  special  reference  to  his  Messianic  mission,  or  with  the  same 
end  in  view  as  in  his  ordinary  administration  of  the  rite,  involving  in  its 
subjects  a  consciousness  of  sin  and  need  of  repentance.  Now  it  is  clear 
that  he  did  not  take  upon  himself  to  decide  to  lohat  individual  the 
Messianic  baptism  was  to  be  administered,  nor  was  he  willing  to  rest  ir 
upon  any  human  testimony,  but  waited  for  the  promised  sign  fi-or:. 
heaven  ;  and  as  for  Jesus'  receiving  the  rite  in  the  second  sense  at  his 
hands,  his  own  religious  sense  must  have  rebelled  against  it.  Nor  is 
this  contradicted  by  his  words  recorded  in  John,  i.,  31,  "  And  J  knew 
liim  not ;  hut  that  he  should  he  made  manifest  to  Israel,  therefore  am  I 
come  haptizing  loith  tvatcrP     John's  refusal  to  baptize  Christ  did  not 

life  were  rejected;  in  short,  his  Divine  and  hninan  nature  were  rudely  torn  asunder.  We 
see  in  all  this  the  effect  of  a  onesided  theory  in  ohscuring  historj-,  and  detect  in  it  also  the 
germ  of  a  tendency  which  led  the  way  from  Judaism  to  Gnosticism.  So  it  was  with  the 
doctrines  of  Cerinthus  and  Basilides  on  the  person  of  Christ,  according  to  which  Christ 
possessed,  as  man,  the  uiiaprnTtudv  of  human  nature  (although  it  never  became  actual  sin 
in  him);  and  the  lledeerner  was  not  Chrhf,  but  the  heavenly  Spirit  that  desc^ided  upon 
him.  Another  instance  of  the  way  in  which  the  general  object  of  John's  baptism  (viz., 
purification  and  forgiveness)  was  brought  to  bear  upon  the  doctrine  of  the  person  of  Christ 
may  be  seen  in  the  Gospel  of  the  Nazarenes,  translated  by  Jerome,  in  which  the  account 
runs,  that  when  Christ  was  asked  by  his  mother  and  brothers  to  go  with  them  to  John,  in 
cirder  to  be  baptized  for  the  remission  of  sins,  he  replied,  quid  pcccari,  id  vndmn  et  hapti- 
zer  ah  eo,  nisi  forte  hoc  ipsum  quod  dixi  ignorantia  est  ("unless  I,  who  have  not  sinned, 
carry  the  germ  of  sin  unconsciously  within  me").  (Hieron.,  b.  iii..  Dialog,  adv.  Pelag.,  ad 
init.).  It  is  seen  more  strongly  still  in  the  Ki'ipvyjia  Whpov,  according  to  which  Christ  made 
his  confession  of  sin  before  the  baptism,  but  was  glorified  after  it.  Thus  we  see  two  op- 
posite tendencies  conspiring  to  falsify  history  in  the  life  of  Christ.  The  one  sought  falsely 
to  glorify  his  early  life,  and  embellished  his  childhood  with  tales  of  marvel  ;  the  other 
sought  to  degrade  his  prior  life  as  nmcli  as  possible,  in  order  to  derive  all  that  he  after- 
ward became  from  bis  Messianic  inauguration.  Tlie  relation  of  our  Gospels  to  both  these 
false  and  one-sideil  tendencies  is  a  proof  of  their  originality.  I  cannot  suppose,  with  Dr. 
Schnechcnbnrgcr  (Studicn  der  Evang.  GoistHchkeit  Wintcmbnrgs,  Bd.  iv.,  s.  122),  tliat 
Matthew's  simple  account  of  Christ's  baptism  was  abridged  from  the  Ehionitish  naiTative, 
which,  as  we  have  seen,  gives  evidence  of  a  designedly  false  colouring.  Nor  can  I  agree 
with  Usteri  and  Bhxk  (Stud.  u.  Krit.,  Bd.  ii.,  s.  44G,  and  1833,  s.  436),  tiiat  the  dialogue  be- 
tween John  and  Clirist,  wliich,  acconhug  to  the  Ehionitish  version,  took  place  during  the 
baptism,  is  inaccurately  placed  by  Matthew  before  it. 


THE  BAPTISM  OF  CHRIST.  67 

necessarily  involve  (as  v^^e  have  already  said)  a  knowledge  of  his  ]\Ies- 
sianic  dignity  ;  and  the  words  just  quoted  refer  only  to  that  dignity. 
He  means  to  say  with  emphasis  that  his  conviction  of  Christ's  Messiah- 
ship  is  not  of  human,  but  of  Divine  origin.  His  previous  expectations, 
founded  upon  his  knowledge  of  the  circumstances  of  Christ's  birth, 
were  held  as  nothing  in  comparison  with  the  Divine  testimony  imme- 
diately vouchsafed  to  him.* 

(8.)  The  Vision  at  the  Baptism,  and  the  Voice,  iutended  exckisively  for  the  Baptist. 

When  the  Baptist  thus  drew  back  in  reverence  and  awe,  Christ  en- 
couraged him,  saying,  "  For  the  present,^  suffer  it ;  for  thus  it  becomes 
us  (each  from  his  own  stand-point)  to  fulfil  all  that  belongs  to  the  order 
of  God's  kingdom."  While  Jesus  prayed  and  was  baptized,  the 
reverence  with  which  John  gazed  upon  him  was  heightened  into  pro- 
phetic inspiration ;  and  in  this  state  he  received  the  revelation  of  the 
Divine  Spirit  in  the  form  of  a  symbolical  vision ;  the  heavens  opened, 
and  he  saw  a  dove  descend  and  hover  over  the  head  of  Christ.  In  this 
he  saw  a  sign  of  the  pennanent  abode  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  Jesus  ;  not 
merely  as  a  distinction  fi'om  the  inspired  seers  of  the  old  dispensation, 
but  also  as  the  necessary  condition  to  his  bestowing  the  Divine  life 
upon  others.  It  indicated  that  the  power  of  the  Spirit  in  him  was  not 
a  sudden  and  abrupt  manifestation,  as  it  was  in  the  prophets,  who  felt 
its  inspiration  at  certain  times  and  by  transitory  impulses ;  but  a  con- 
tinuous and  unbroken  operation  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  infinite  fulness 
of  the  Divine  life  in  human  form.  The  quiet  flight  and  the  resting  dove 
betokened  no  rushing  torrent  of  inspiration,  no  sudden  seizure  of  the 
Spirit,  but  a  uniform  vmfolding  of  the  life  of  God,  the  loftiness,  yet  the 
calm  repose  of  a  nature  itself  Divine,  the  indwelling  of  the  Spirit  so  that 

*  It  was  the  main  object  of  John  the  EvangeHst  to  bring  out  prominently  the  Divine  tes- 
timony given  to  John  the  Baptist  (as  tlie  latter  pointed  the  former  originally  to  Christ); 
the  knowledge  which  the  latter  had  derived  from  human  sources  was  comparatively  unim- 
portant. In  fact,  he  seems  not  to  have  thought  any  thing  about  it,  and  hence  his  words  may 
imply  that  the  Baptist  had  no  previous  acquaintaince  at  all  with  Christ ;  but  such  an  inter- 
pretation of  them  is  not  necessary,  considering  the  definite  end  which  he  had  in  view. 
'  Let  an  event  be  described  by  different  eye-witnesses,  and  their  accounts  will  present  vari- 
eties and  even  contrasts,  simply  because  each  of  them  seizes  strongly  upon  some  one  point, 
and  leaves  the  rest  comparatively  in  the  back-ground.  True,  there  are  degrees  in  historical 
accuracy,  and  we  must  distinguish  them.  In  this  case,  the  one  certain  fact,  involved  in  all 
the  narratives,  however  they  may  differ  in  other  respects,  is,  that  the  Baptist  was  led,  by  a 
revelation  made  to  him  at  the  time,  to  consecrate  Jesus  to  the  Messiahship  by  baptism. 
This  fact  must  remain,  even  if  the  other  discrepancies  were  irreconcilable.  We  always 
consider  a  thing  stated  in  common  by  several  variant  historical  narratives,  to  be  more  prob- 
ably historically  true. 

t  Showing  that  this  relation  between  him  and  the  Baptist  was  to  be  but  momentary,  and 
goon  to  be  fullowed  by  a  very  different  one.  De  Wette's  remarks  (Comm.,  2d  ed.)  seem  to 
me  not  very  cogent.  "  Christ  describes  his  baptism  as  rpi-ov,  and  hence  this  view  cannot 
be  correct."  But  what  made  it  T^pi^ov  was  the  fact  that  it  was  but  transitory  and  prepara- 
tory to  the  revelation  of  Christ  in  all  his  glory.  The  remark  of  Christ  afiplied  to  the  now, 
and  only  to  the  nou:.     The  apri.  implies  the  contrast,  which  is  not  expressed. 


68  JOHN  THE  BAPTIST. 

lie  could  impart  it  to  others  and  fill  them  completely  with  it,  not  as  a 
prophet,  but  as  a  Creator. 

The  higher  and  essential  unity  of  the  Divine  and  human,*  as  ori- 
ginal and  permanent  in  Christ,  which  formed  the  substance  symbolized 
by  the  vision,  was  further  and  more  distinctly  indicated  to  John  by  the 
voice  from  heaven,t  saying,  "  This  is  my  beloved  So?i,  in  wJiom  I  am 
well  pleased"  Words  that  cannot  possibly  be  applicable,  in  their  full 
meaning,  to  any  mei'e  man,  but  to  Him  alone  in  whom  the  perfect 
union  of  God  and  man  was  exhibited,  and  the  idea  of  humanity  com- 
pletely realized.  It  was  this  union  that  made  it  possible  for  a  holy 
God  to  he  well  ijileased  in  man.  John's  Gospel,  it  is  true,  makes  no 
mention  of  this  voice ;  but  it  will  be  recollected  that  this  evangelist 
does  not  relate  the  baptism  (John,  i.,  29,  33),  but  cites  John  Baptist  as 
referring  to  it  at  some  later  period.  The  subsequent  testimony  of  the 
Baptist,  thus  recorded  ("  I  saiv  and  bare  record  that  this  is  the  So?i  of 
God,"  V.  34),  presupposes  the  heavenly  voice  which  pointed  out  that 
Sonship.  At  all  events,  the  voice  expressed  nothing  different  from  the 
import  of  the  vision ;  it  was  the  expression  of  the  idea  which  the  vision 
itself  involved. 

We  consider,  then,  that  the  vision  and  the  voice  contained  a  subject- 
ive revelation  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  intended  exclusively  for  the  Baptist,| 

*  We  do  not  intend  to  say,  by  any  means,  that  John  comprehended  this  in  the  full  sense 
which  we,  from  the  Christian  stand-point,  are  able  to  give  to  it. 

t  Although  the  words  of  the  voice,  as  given  in  our  Gospels,  contain  at  most  only  an  al- 
lusion to  Psalm  ii.,  7,  we  find  that  passage  fully  quoted  in  the  Ebionitish  Evang.  ad  He- 
braos.  The  words  arc  still  better  put  together  in  the  Nazarean  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews, 
used  by  Jerome:  Factum  est  autem  quum  ascendisset  Dominus  de  aqua,  descendit  fons 
omnis  Spiritus  Sancti  et  requievit  super  sum,  et  dixit  illi ;  Fill  mi,  in  omnibus  prophetis 
expectabam  te,  ut  venires  et  requiescerem  in  te.  Tu  es  enim  requies  mea,  tu  es  filius 
mens  primogenitus,  qui  regnas  in  sempiternum  (Hieron.,  1.  iv.,  in  Esaiam,  c.  xi.,  ed.  V'al- 
larsi,  t.  iv.,  p.  1,  f.  15(3).  Here  a  profound  Christian  sense  is  expressed:  Christ  is  the  aim 
of  the  whole  Theocratic  developement,  and  the  partial  revelations  of  the  Old  Testament 
were  directed  to  him  as  the  concentration  of  all  Divinity ;  in  him  the  Holy  Ghost  finds  a 
permanent  abode  in  humanity,  a  resting-place  for  which  it  strove  in  all  its  wanderuigs 
through  these  isolated,  fragmentary  revelations ;  he  is  the  Son  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  in  so  far 
as  the  fulness  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  concentrated  in  him.  But  although  a  Christian  sense 
is  given,  the  historical  facts  are  obviously  coloured. 

X  We  follow  here  especially  the  account  of  John,  according  to  whom  the  Baptist  testi- 
fied only  of  what  he  had  seen  and  heard.  If  this  statement  be  presupposed  as  the  original 
one,  the  rest  could  easily  be  derived  from  it.  What  the  Baptist  stated  as  a  real  fact  for 
himself  would  readily  assume  an  objective  fonn  when  related  by  others.  This  original  ap- 
prehension of  the  matter  seems  to  appear  also  in  Matthew  (iii.,  10),  both  from  the  heavenly 
voice  being  mentioned  in  indirect  narration,  and  from  the  relation  of  dbc  to  avrbv ;  although 
the  expression  is  not  jjcrfectly  clear  (couf  Blcck,  Stud.  u.  Krit.,  1833,  s.  433,  and  De  Wctle. 
in  loc).  A  confirniation  of  tlie  originality  of  Matthew's  account  may  be  obtained  by  com- 
paring it  with  that  in  the  Ebionitish  Gospel.  In  tliis,  first,  the  words  are  directly  address- 
ed to  Christ,  and  Psalm  ii.,  7,  fully  quoted  ;  then  a  sudden  light  illuminates  the  place,  and 
the  voice  repeats  anew,  in  an  altogether  objective  way,  the  words  that  had  been  directed 
to  Christ.  In  comparing  our  Evangelists  with  each  other,  and  with  the  Ebionitish  Gospel, 
we  see  how  the  simple  historical  statement  passed,  by  various  interpolations,  into  the 
Ebionitish  form ;  and  how  a  material  alteration  of  the  facts  arose  from  a  change  of  form, 


THE  BAPTISM  OF  CHRIST.  69 

to  convince  him  thoroughly  that  He  whose  coming  he  had  proclaimed, 
and  whose  way  he  had  prepared,  had  really  appeared.  He  was  alone 
with  Jesus  ;  the  latter  needed  no  such  revelation.  What  was  granted 
to  John  was  enough ;  he  recognized,  infallibly,  the  voice  from  heaven, 
and  the  revelation  of  the  Spirit,  by  his  inward  sense ;  no  butward  sen- 
sible impression  could  give  him  more.  For  others  the  vision  was  not 
intended;  it  could  benefit  them  only  mediately  through  him,  and  in  case 
they  regarded  him  as  a  prophet. 

After  Jesus  had  thus,  alone  with  John,  submitted  to  his  baptism,  and 
received  in  it  the  sign  for  the  commencement  of  his  public  Messianic 
ministry,  he  withdrew  into  solitude  in  order  to  prepare  himself,  by 
prayer  and  meditation,*  for  the  work  on  which  he  was  about  to  enter. 
This  brings  us  to  inquire  more  closely  into  Christ's  suhjective  prepara- 
tion for  his  public  labours. 

through  the  addition  of  an  imaginary  and  foreign  dogmatic  element.  These  accounts  form 
the  basis,  also,  of  the  view  held  by  the  sect  cnWeA  Ma ndce.ans  (Zabii,  disciples  of  John),  who 
combined  the  elements  of  a  sect  of  John's  disciples  opposed  to  Cliristianity,  with  Gnostic 
elements.  But  as  their  object  was  to  glorify  the  Baptist  rather  than  Christ,  they  further 
distorted  and  disfigured  the  original  with  new  inventions.  "  The  Spirit,  called  the  Messen- 
ger of  Life,  in  whose  name  John  baptized,  appears  from  a  higher  region,  manifests  still 
more  extraordinary  phenomena,  submits  to  be  baptized  by  John,  and  then  transfigures  him 
with  celestial  radiance.  Jesus  afterward  comes  hypocritically  to  be  baptized  by  John,  in 
order  to  draw  away  the  people  and  corrupt  his  doctrine  and  baptism."  (See  Norberg's 
Religionshuch  of  this  sect.) 

*  The  chronology  of  the  Gcspels  by  no  means  excludes  such  a  time  of  preparation,  al- 
though we  cannot  decide  whether  the  "forty  days"  are  to  be  taken  literally,  or  only  as  a 
round  number.  John's  Gospel,  as  we  have  said,  does  not  relate  the  baptism  in  its  chrono- 
logical connexion  (John,  i.,  19,  presupposes  the  occurrence  of  the  baptism) ;  so  that  there  is 
no  difRculty  in  supposing  a  lapse  of  several  weeks  between  the  baptism  and  the  first  pub- 
lic appearance  of  Christ.  The  words  in  John,  i.,  29,  may  have  been  the  greeting  of  the  Bap- 
tist on  first  meeting  Christ  upon  his  reappearance.  Nor  does  the  retirement  of  Christ 
throw  a  shade  upon  the  credibility  of  the  narrative  as  matter  of  fact.  It  is  entirely  op- 
jtosed  to  the  mt/thical  theory;  for  we  do  not  see  in  it  (as  we  should  were  it  a  mytlms)  any 
of  the  ideas  of  the  people  among  whom  Christianity  originated  ;  on  the  contrarj',  it  displays 
a  wisdom  and  circumspection  in  direct  antagonism  to  the  prevailing  tendencies  of  the  time. 
As  St.  John's  object  was  only  to  state  those  facts  in  Christ's  life  of  which  he  had  himself 
been  an  eye-witness,  his  silence  on  the  subject  is  easily  accounted  for. 


PART   II. 

SUBJECTIVE   PREPARATION.     THE   TEMPTATION. 


CHAPTER  I. 

IMPORT  OF  THE  INDIVIDUAL  TEMPTATIONS. 

WHILE,  on  the  one  hand,  we  do  not  conceive  that  the  individual 
features  of  the  account  of  the  Temptation  are  to  be  hterally  ta- 
ken, the  principles  which  triumph  so  gloriously  in  its  course  bear  the 
evident  stamp  of  that  wisdom  which  every  where  shines  forth  from 
the  life  of  Christ.  Its  veracity  is  undeniably  confirmed  by  the  period 
which  it  occupies  between  the  baptism  of  Christ  and  his  entrance  on 
his  public  ministry ;  the  silent,  solitary  preparation  was  a  natural  tran- 
sition from  the  one  to  the  other.  We  conclude,  from  both  these  con- 
siderations together,  that  the  account  contains  not  only  an  ideal,  but 
also  a  historical  truth,  conveyed,  however,  under  a  symbolical  form.* 

The  easiest  part  of  our  task  is  to  ascertain  the  import  of  the  several 
])arts  of  the  Temptation,  and  to  this  we  now  address  ourselves.  We 
shall  find  in  them  the  principles  which  guided  Jesus  through  his  whole 
Messianic  calling — principles  directly  opposed  to  the  notions  prevalent 
among  the  Jews  in  regard  to  the  Messiah. 

§  43.  The  Hunger. 
The  first  temptation  was  as  follows  :t  After  Jesus  had  fasted  for  a 
long  time,  he  suffered  the  pangs  of  hunger.  As  no  food  was  to  be  had 
in  the  desert,  the  suggestion  was  made  to  him,  "  If  thou  art  really  the 
Messiah,  the  Son  of  God,  this  need  cannot  embarrass  thee.  Thou 
canst  help  thyself  readily  by  a  miracle ;  thou  canst  change  the  stones 
of  the  desert  into  bread."    Jesus  rejected  this  challenge  with  the  words, 

*  If  we  assign  a  symbolical  character  to  the  Temptation,  it  may  be  asked  whether  the 
fasting,  which  formed  a  ground-work  for  it,  was  not  symbolical  also.  But  tiie  fasting  is 
immediately  connected  with  the  obviously  historical  fact  of  Christ's  retirement.  We  con- 
ceive it  thus:  Christ,  musing  upon  the  great  work  of  his  life,  forgot  the  wants  of  the  body. 
(Cf.  John,  iv.,  34.)  The  mastery  (and  this  we  must  presuppose)  which  his  spirit  had  over 
the  body  prevented  those  wants  from  asserting  their  power  for  a  long  time ;  but  when  they 
did,  it  was  only  the  more  powerfully.  It  fomied  part  of  the  trial  and  self-denial  of  Christ 
through  his  whole  life,  that,  together  with  the  consciousness  that  he  was  the  Sou  of  God. 
be  combined  the  weakness  and  dependence  of  humanity.  These  affected  the  lesser  pow- 
ers of  his  soul,  althoui;h  they  could  never  move  his  unchangingly  holy  will,  and  turn  him 
to  any  selfish  strivings.  t  Matt.,  iv.,  2-1. 


THE  PINNACLE  OF  THE  TEMPLE.  71 

"  Man  shall  not  live  hxj  bread  alone,  hut  hy  every  tcord  tliat  proccedctJi 
out  of  the  mouth  of  Gob"  (what  is  produced  by  God's  creative  word). 
To  apprehend  these  words  rightly,  we  must  recall  their  original  con- 
nexion in  Deuteronomy  (viii.,  3),  viz.,  that  the  Jews  were  fed  in  the 
wilderness  with  manna,  in  order  to  learn  that  the  power  of  God  could 
sustain  human  life  by  other  means  than  ordinary  food.  They  longed 
for  the  bread  and  flesh  of  Egypt,  but  were  to  be  taught  submission  to 
the  will  of  God,  who  was  pleased  to  supply  their  wants  with  a  differ- 
ent food.  Applying  this  thought  to  Christ's  circumstances,  we  interpret 
his  reply  to  the  tempter  as  follows:  "  Far  be  it  from  me  to  prescribe 
to  God  the  mode  in  which  he  shall  provide  me  sustenance.  Rather 
will  I  trust  his  omnipotent  creative  power,  which  can  find  means  to 
satisfy  my  hunger,  even  in  the  desert,  though  it  may  not  be  with  man's 
usual  food." 

The  principle  involved  in  the  reply  was,  that  he  had  no  wish  to 
free  himself  from  the  sense  of  human  weakness  and  dependence  ;  that 
he  would  work  no  miracle  for  t/tat  purpose.  He  would  work  no  mir- 
acle to  satisfy  his  own  will ;  no  miracle  where  the  momentary  want 
might  be  supplied,  though  by  natural  means  such  as  might  offend  the 
sensual  appetite.  In  self-denial  he  would  follow  God,  submitting  to 
His  will,  and  trusting  that  His  mighty  power  would  help  in  the  time 
of  need,  in  the  way  that  His  wisdom  might  see  fit.  On  this  same  prin- 
ciple Christ  acted  when  he  suffered  his  apostles  to  satisfy  their  hunger 
with  the  corn  which  they  had  plucked,  rather  than  do  a  miracle  to  pro- 
vide them  better  food.  On  this  same  principle  he  acted  when  he  gave 
himself  to  the  Jewish  officers  sent  to  apprehend  him,*  rather  than  seek 
deliverance  by  a  Divine  interposition.  Of  the  same  kind,  too,  was  his 
trial  when  he  hung  upon  the  cross,  and  they  that  passed  by  said,  "Ifhe 
be  the  King  of  Israel,  let  liim  noio  come  down  from  the  cross,  and  we  will 
believe  him."] 

§  44.  The  Pinnacle  of  the  Temple. 
He  was  then  taken  to  the  pinnacle  of  the  Temple,  and  the  tempter 
said  to  him,  "  If  thou  be  the  Son  of  God,  cast  thyself  down  ;  thou  ait 
sure  of  aid  by  a  miracle  from  God  ;"  and  quoted,  literally,  in  applica- 
tion, the  words  of  Psa.  xci.,  11,  12,  "  The  angels  shall  hear  thee  uj)  in 
their  hands,  lest  thou  dash  thy  foot  against  a  stone."  But  Christ  arrays 
against  him  another  passage,  which  defines  the  right  application  of  the 
former:  "  Thou  shall  not  tempt  the  Lord  thy  God."  (Deut.,  vi.,  16.) 
As  ifhe  had  said,  "  Thou  must  undertake  nothing  with  a  view  to  test 
God's  omnipotence,  as  if  to  try  whether  he  will  work  a  miracle  to  save 
thee  from  a  peril  that  might  be  avoided  by  natural  means"  (i.  e.,  by 
coming  down  from  the  battlement  in  the  usual  way). 

*  Matt.,  xxvi.,  53.  t  lb.,  xxvii.,  42. 


72  THE  TEMPTATION. 

These  words  of  Christ  imply  that  the  pious  man  can  look  for  Divine 
aid  at  all  times,  provided  he  uses  rightly  the  means  which  God  affords 
him,  and  walks  in  the  way  which  has  been  Divinely  marked  out  for  him 
by  his  calling  and  his  circumstances  :  the  Messiah  was  not,  in  gratui- 
tous confidence  of  Divine  assistance,  to  cast  himself  into  a  danger  which 
common  prudence  might  avoid.  They  involve  the  principle,  that  a  mir- 
acle may  not  be  wrought  except  for  wise  ends  and  with  adequate  mo- 
tives ;  never,  with  no  other  aim  than  to  display  the  power  of  working 
wonders,  and  to  make  a  momentary,  sensible  impression,  which,  how- 
ever powerful,  could  leave  no  religious  effect,  and,  not  penetrating  be- 
yond the  region  of  the  senses,  must  be  but  transient  there.  And  on 
this  principle  Christ  acted  always,  in  not  voluntarily  exposing  himself 
to  peril ;  in  employing  wise  and  prudent  means  to  escape  the  snares  of 
his  enemies ;  and  going  forth,  with  trust  in  GrOD  and  submission  to  his 
will,  to  meet  such  dangers  only  as  his  Divine  mission  made  necessary, 
and  as  he  could  not  avoid  without  unfaithfulness  to  his  calling.  On  this 
principle  he  acted  when  the  Pharisees  and  the  fleshly-minded  multi- 
tude came  to  him  and  asked  a  miracle,  and  he  refused  them  with, 
["  there  shall  no  sign  he  given  to  this  wicked  and  adulterous  generation 
but  the  sign  of  the  Trophet  Jo7iahy\* 

§  45.  Dominion. 

We  do  not  take  the  third  temptation  as  implying  literally  that  Satan 
proposed  to  Christ  to  fall  down  and  do  him  homage,  as  the  price  of  a 
transfer  of  dominion  over  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  world :  no  extraor- 
dinary degree  of  piety  would  have  been  necessary  to  rebuke  such  a 
jiroposal  as  this.  We  consider  it.  as  involving  the  two  following  points, 
which  must  be  taken  together,  viz.,  (1)  the  establishment  of  Messiah's 
dominion  as  an  outward  kingdom,  with  worldly  splendours;  and  (^2) 
the  worship  of  Satan  in  connexion  with  it,  which,  though  not  fully  ex- 
pressed, is  implied  in  the  act  which  he  demands,  and  which  Christ 
treats  as  equivalent  to  worshipping  him.  Herein  was  the  temptation, 
that  the  Messiah  should  not  developc  his  kingdom  gradually,  and  in  its 
pure  spirituality  from  within,  but  should  establish  it  at  once,  as  an  out- 
ward dominion  ;  and  that,  although  this  could  not  be  accomplished  with- 
out the  use  of  an  evil  agency,  the  end  would  sanctify  the  means. 

We  find  here  the  principle,  that  to  try  to  establish  Messiah's  king- 
dom as  an  outward,  worldly  dominion,  is  to  wish  to  turn  the  kingdom 
of  God  into  the  kingdom  of  the  devil;  and  to  employ  that  fallen  Intel- 
ligence which  pervades  all  human  sovereignties,  only  in  a  different  form, 
to  found  the  reign  of  Christ.  And  in  rejecting  the  temptation,  Christ 
condemned  every  mode  of  secularizing  his  kingdom,  as  well  as  all  the 
devil-worship  which  must  result  from  attempting  that  kingdom  in  a 

*  Matt.,  xii.,  39. 


THE  TEMPTATION  NOT  INWARD.  73 

worldly  form.  We  find  here  the  principle,  that  God's  work  is  to  be 
accomplished  purely  as  His  work  and  by  His  power,  without  foreio^n 
aid  ;  so  that  it  shall  all  be  only  a  share  of  the  worship  rendered  to  Him 
alone. 

And  Christ's  whole  life  illustrates  this  principle.  How  often  was  he 
urged,  by  the  impatient  longings  and  the  worldly  spirit  of  the  people, 
to  gratify  their  intense,  long-cherished  hopes,  and  establish  his  kingdom 
in  a  worldly  form,  before  the  last  demand  of  the  kind  was  made  upon 
him,  as  he  entered,  in  the  midst  of  an  enthusiastic  host,  the  capital  city 
of  God's  earthly  reign ;  before  his  last  refusal,  expressed  in  his  sub- 
mission to  those  sufferings  which  resulted  in  the  triumph  of  God's  pure 
spiritual  kingdom  ! 


CHAPTER  11. 

IMPORT  OF  THE  TEMPTATION  AS  A  WHOLE. 

§  46.  Fundamental  Idea. 
I  HE  whole  temptation  taken  together  presents  us  one  idea ;  a  con- 
trast, namely,  between  the  founding  of  God's  kingdom  as  pure, 
spiritual,  and  tried  by  many  forms  of  self-denial  in  the  slow  develope- 
ment  ordained  for  it  by  its  head;  and  the  sudden  establislnnent  of  that 
kingdom  before  men,  as  visible  and  earthly.  This  contrast  forms  the 
(•entral  point  of  the  whole.  All  the  temptations  have  regard  to  the 
created  will  as  such ;  the  victory  presupposes  that  self-sacrifice  of  a 
will  given  up  to  God  which  determines  the  whole  life.  And  as  this 
self-sacrifice  of  the  created  will  in  Christ  had  to  be  tested  in  his  life- 
long struggles  with  the  Spirit  of  the  world,  which  ever  strove  to  obscure 
the  idea  of  the  kingdom  of  God  and  bring  it  down  to  its  own  level ;  so 
tlie  free  and  conscious  decision  manifested  in  these  three  temptations, 
fully  contrasting,  as  they  did,  the  true  and  the  false  IMessiahship,  the  un- 
worldly and  the  secularized  Theocracy,  was  made  before  his  public  min- 
istry, which  itself  was  but  a  continuation  of  the  strife  and  the  triumph. 

§  47.    The  Temptation  rot  an  inward  one,  hut  the  Work  of  Satan. 

We  find,  then,  in  the  facts  of  the  temptation  the  expression  of  that 
period  that  intervened  between  Christ's  private  life  and  his  public  min- 
istry. These  inward  spiritual  exercises  bring  out  the  self-determination 
which  stamps  itself  upon  all  his  subsequent  outward  actions.  Yet  we 
dare  not  suppose  in  him  a  choice,  which,  presupposing  within  him  a  point 
of  tangency  for  evil,  would  involve  the  necessity  of  his  comparing  the 
evil  vsjith  the  good,  and  deciding  between  them.  In  the  steadfast  ten- 
dency of  his  inner  life,  rooted  in  submission  to  God,  lay  a  decision 


74  THE  TEMPTATION, 

which  admitted  of  no  such  struggle.  He  had  in  common  with  human- 
ity that  natural  weakness  which  may  exist  without  selfishness,  and  the 
created  will,  mutable  in  its  own  nature ;  and  only  on  this  side  was  the 
struggle  possible — such  a  struggle  as  man  may  have  been  liable  to,  be- 
fore he  gave  seduction  the  power  of  temjitation  by  his  own  actual  sin. 
In  all  other  respects,  the  outward  seductions  remained  outward  ;  they 
found  no  selfishness  in  him,  as  in  other  men,  on  which  to  seize,  and  thus 
become  internal  temptations,  but,  on  the  contrary,  only  aided  in  reveal- 
ing the  complete  unity  of  the  Divine  and  human,  which  formed  the  es- 
sence of  his  inner  life. 

Nor  is  it  possible  for  us  to  imagine  that  these  temptations  originated 
withni ;  to  imagine  that  Christ,  in  contemplating  the  course  of  his  fu- 
ture ministry,  had  an  internal  struggle  to  decide  whether  he  should  act 
according  to  his  own  will,  or  in  self-denial  and  submission  to  the  will  of 
God.  We  have  seen  from  the  third  temptation  that,  from  the  very  be- 
ginning, he  regarded  the  establishment  of  a  worldly  kingdom  as  insep- 
arable from  the  worship  of  the  devil;  he  could,  therefore,  have  had  no 
struggle  to  choose  between  such  a  kingdom,  outward  and  worldly,  and 
the  true  Messiah-kingdom,  spiritual,  and  developed  from  within. 

Even  the  purest  man  who  has  a  great  work  to  do  for  any  age,  must 
be  affected  more  or  less  by  the  prevailing  ideas  and  tendencies  of  that 
age.  Unless  he  struggle  against  it,  the  spirit  of  the  age  will  penetrate 
his  own  ;  his  spiritual  life  and  its  products  will  be  corrupted  by  the  base 
admixture.  Now  the  whole  spirit  of  the  age  of  Christ  held  that  Mes- 
siah's kingdom  was  to  be  of  this  world,  and  even  John  Baptist  could  not 
free  himself  from  this  conception.  There  was  nothing  loithin  Christ  on 
which  the  sinful  spirit  of  the  age  could  seize  ;  the  Divine  life  within 
him  had  brought  every  thing  temporal  into  harmony  with  itself;  and, 
therefore,  this  tendency  of  the  times  to  secularize  the  Theocratic  idea 
could  take  no  hold  of  him.  But  it  was  to  press  upon  him  from  tcith- 
out;  from  the  beginning  this  tendency  threatened  to  corrupt  the  idea  and 
the  developement  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  Christ's  work  had  to  be 
kept  free  from  it;  moreover,  the  nature  of  his  own  Messianic  ministry 
could  only  be  fully  illustrated  by  contrast  with  this  possible  objective 
mode  of  action;  to  which,  foreign  as  it  was  to  his  own  spiritual  tenden- 
cies, he  was  so  frequently  to  be  urged  afterward  by  the  j^revailing 
spirit  of  the  times. 

But  if,  according  to  the  doctrine  of  Christ,*  the  rebellion  of  a  higher 

*  We  mast  hereafter  inquire  whether  this  m  Christ's  doctrine,  and  only  make  here  a 
preliminary  remark  or  two.  The  arguments  of  the  rationalists  against  the  doctrine  which 
teaches  the  existence  of  Satan  are  either  directed  as-ainst  a  false  and  arhitrary  conception 
of  that  doctrine,  or  else  go  u[)on  the  presupposition  that  evil  could  only  have  origini>tc(l  un- 
der conditions  such  as  those  under  which  human  existence  has  developed  itself;  that  it  has 
its  ground  in  the  organism  of  human  nature,  c.  g-.,  in  the  oi)positiou  between  reason  and  the 


AS  THE  WORK  OF  SATAN.  75 

intelligence  against  God  preceded  the  whole  present  history  of  the  uni- 
verse, in  which  Evil  is  one  of  the  co-operating  factors,  and  of  which 
man's  history  is  only  a  part ;  if  that  doctrine  makes  Satan  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  Evil  which  he  first  brought  into  reality  ;  if,  further,  it 
lays  down  a  connexion,  concealed  from  the  eye  of  man,  between  him 
and  all  evil ;  then,  from  this  point  of  view,  Christ's  contest  with  the 
spirit  of  the  world  must  appear  to  us  a  contest  with  Satan — the  tempta- 
tion, a  temptation  from  Satan — continued  afterward  through  his  whole 
life,  and  renewed  in  every  form  of  assault,  until  the  final  triumph  was 
announced,  "It  is  JinisJied."  As  the  temptation  could  not  have  origi- 
nated in  Christ,  he  could  only  attribute  it  to  that  Spirit  to  which  all 
opposition  to  God's  kingdom,  and  every  attempt  to  corrupt  its  pure  de- 
velopement,  can  finally  be  traced  back.  On  the  working  out  of  Christ's 
plan  depended  the  is^ue  of  the  battle  between  the  kingdom  of  God  and 
the  kingdom  of  the  Evil  One ;  and  we  cannot  wonder,  therefore,  that 
this  Spirit,  ever  so  restlessly  plotting  against  the  Divine  order,  should 
have  been  active  and  alert  at  a  time  when,  as  in  the  case  of  the  first 
man,  an  opening  for  temptation  to  the  mutable  created  will  was  afford- 
ed to  him. 

Christ  left  to  his  disciples  and  the  Church  only  a  partial  and  symbol- 
ical account*  of  the  facts  of  his  inner  life  in  this  preparatory  epoch  ;  au 
account,  however,  adapted  to  their  practical  necessities,  and  serving  to 
guard  them  against  those  seductions  of  the  spirit  of  the  world  to  which 
even  the  productions  of  the  Divine  spirit  must  yield,  if  they  are  ever 
allowed  to  become  worldly. 

propensities  ;  that  human  developement  must  necessai'ily  pass  through  it ;  but  that  we  can 
not  conceive  of  a  steadfast  tendency  to  evil  in  au  intelligence  endowed  with  the  higher  spir- 
itual powers.  Now  it  is  precisely  this  view  of  evil  which  we  most  emphatically  oppose,  as 
directly  contradictory  to  the  essence  of  the  Gospel  and  of  a  theistico-ethical  view  of  the 
world ;  and,  on  the  contrary,  we  hold  fast,  as  the  only  doctrine  which  meets  man's  moral 
and  religious  interests,  that  doctrine  which  is  the  ground  of  the  conception  of  Satan,  and 
according  to  which  evil  is  represented  as  the  rebellion  of  a  created  will  against  the  Divine 
law,  as  au  act  of  free-will  not  otherwise  to  be  explained,  and  the  intelligence  as  determined 
by  the  will.  I  am  pleased  to  find  my  convictions  expressed  in  few  words  by  an  eminent 
divine  of  our  own  time,  Dr.  Nitzsch,  in  his  excellent  System  der  Chnstlichen  Lehre,  2d  ed., 
p.  152.  They  are  further  developed  by  Twesten,  in  his  Dogmatik.  The  same  fundamental 
idea  is  given  in  the  work  o(  Julias  Midler,  already  mentioned  {Lehre  voti  der  Siinde). 

*  We  can  apply  here  Dr.  Nilzsck's  remark  in  reference  to  the  Biblical  account  of  the  Fall 
{Chrisil.  Lehre,  §  106,  s.  144^  anm.  1,  2'^-  Aufl.) :  "  The  history  of  the  temptation,  in  this  form. 
is  not  a  real,  but  a  irue  historj-." 


BOOK    IV. 


THE  PUBLIC  MINISTRY  OF  CHRIST 

IN    ITS 
I 

REAL  CONNEXION. 


PART  r.     THE  PLAN  OF  CHRIST. 

PART  H.     THE  MEANS  AND  INSTRUMENTS  OF  CHRIST. 


BOOK  IV. 

THE  PUBLIC  MINISTRY  OF  CHRIST  IN  ITS  REAL  CONNEXION. 

PART   L 

THE    PLAN    OF    CHRIST. 


CHAPTER  1. 
A.   THE  PLAN  OF  CHRIST'S  MINISTRY  IN  GENERAL. 

§  48.  Had  Christ  a  conscious  Plan  1 
T  is  most  natural  for  us,  in  treating  of  Christ's  public  ministry,  to 
speak  first  of  the  ^^Zare  which  lay  at  the  foundation  of  it.     First  of 
all,  however,  the  question  comes  up,  whether  he  had  any  such  plan  at 
all.t 

The  greatest  achievements  of  great  men  in  behalf  of  humanity  have 
not  been  accomplished  by  plans  previously  arranged  and  digested  ;  on 
the  contrary,  such  men  have  generally  been  unconscious  instruments, 
working  out  God's  purposes,  at  least  in  the  beginning,  before  the 
fruits  of  their  labours  have  become  obvious  to  their  own  eyes.  They 
served  the  plan  of  God's  providence  for  the  progress  of  his  kingdom 
among  men,  by  giving  themselves  up  enthusiastically  to  the  ideas  which 
the  Spirit  of  God  had  impaited  to  them.  Not  unfrequently  has  a  false 
historical  view  ascribed  to  such  labours,  after  their  results  became 
known,  a  plan  which  had  nothing  to  do  with  their  developement.  Nay, 
these  mighty  men  were  able  to  do  their  gi'eat  deeds  precisely  because 
a  higher  than  human  wisdom  formed  the  plan  of  their  labours  and  pre- 
pared the  way  for  them.  The  work  was  greater  than  the  workmen ; 
they  had  no  presentiments  of  the  results  that  were  to  follow  from  the 
toils  to  which  they  felt  themselves  impelled.     So  was  it  with  Luther, 

*  To  promote  unity  of  view,  I  deem  it  best,  especially  as  much  of  the  chronolog-ical  order 
must  remain  uncertain,  to  treat  and  divide  Christ's  public  ministry, _/?rs#,  according  to  its 
substantial  connexion,  and,  iecondly,  according  to  its  chronological  connexion. 

t  We  use  the  phrase  "  plan  of  Jesus,"  inasmuch  as  we  compare  his  mode  of  action 
with  that  of  other  world-historical  men,  in  order  to  bring  out  the  characteristic  features 
which  distinguish  him.  The  exposition  which  follows  will  show  that  I  agree  with  the  apt 
t-emarks  of  my  worthy  friend,  Dr.  TJllmann,  made  in  his  beautiful  treatise  on  the  "  Simden- 
losigkeit  Jesu''  (Sinlcssness  of  Jesus),  p.  71,  and  tliat  his  censures  there  of  those  who  use 
the  above-mentioned  phrase  do  not  apply  to  me.  [See  Ullmann's  Treatise,  translated  by 
Edwards  and  Park,  in  the  "Selections  from  German  Literature."] 


80  THE  PLAN  OF  CHRIST. 

when  he  kindled  the  spark  which  set  half  Europe  in  a  blaze,  and  com- 
menced the  sacred  flame  which  refined  the  Christian  Church. 

Were  we  at  liberty  to  compare  the  work  of  Christ  with  these  cre- 
ations Avi'ought  through  human  agencies,  we  should  need  to  guard  our- 
selves against  determining  the  plan  of  his  ministry  from  its  results. 
We  might  then  suppose  tliat  he  was  inspired  with  enthusiasm  for  an 
idea,  whose  compass  and  consequences  the  limits  of  his  circumstances 
and  his  times  prevented  him  from  fully  apprehending.  We  might  also 
distinguish  between  the  idea,  as  made  the  guide  and  the  aim  of  his  ac- 
tions by  himself,  and  the  more  comprehensive  Divine  plan,  to  which, 
by  his  voluntary  and  thorough  devotion  to  God,  he  served  as  the  organ. 
And  it  would  rather  glorify  than  disparage  him  to  show,  by  thus  com- 
paring him  with  other  men  who  had  wrought  as  God's  instruments  to 
accomplish  His  vast  designs,  that  God  had  accomplished  through  him 
even  greater  things  than  he  had  himself  intended. 

But  we  ai'e  allowed  to  make  no  such  comparison.  The  life  of  Christ 
presented  a  realized  ideal  of  human  culture  such  as  man's  nature  can 
never  attain  unto,  let  his  developement  reach  what  point  it  may.  He 
described  the  future  effects  of  the  truth  which  he  revealed  in  a  way 
that  no  man  could  comprehend  at  the  time,  and  which  centuries  of  his- 
tory have  only  been  contributing  to  illustrate.  Nor  was  the  progress 
of  \he future  more  clear  to  his  vision  than  the  steps  in  the  history  of 
the  past,  as  is  shown  by  his  own  statements  of  the  relation  which  he 
sustained  to  the  old  dispensation.  Facts,  which  it  required  the  course 
of  ages  to  make  clear,  lay  open  to  his  eye ;  and  history  has  both  ex- 
plained and  verified  the  laws  which  he  pointed  out  for  the  progress  of 
his  kingdom.  He  could  not,  therefore,  have  held  the  same  relation  to 
the  plan  for  whose  accomplishment  his  labours  were  directed,  as  men 
who  were  mere  instruments  of  God,  however  great.  He  resembled 
them,  it  is  true,  in  the  fact  that  his  labours  were  ordered  according  lo 
no  plan  of  human  contrivance,  but  to  one  laid  down  by  God  for  the 
developement  of  humanity;  but  he  differed  from  them  in  this,  that  Hi: 
understood  the  full  compass  of  God's  plan,  and  had  freely  made  it  his 
own  ;  that  it  was  the  plan  of  his  own  mind,  clearly  standing  forth  in 
his  consciousness  when  he  commenced  his  labours.  The  account  of  his 
temptation,  rightly  understood,  shows  all  this. 

With  this,  also,  are  rebutted  those  views  which  consider  Clu'ist  as 
having  recognized  the  idea  of  his  ministry  only  through  the  cloudy  at- 
mosphere of  Judaism ;  and  those  which  represent  his  plan  as  having 
been  essentially  altered  from  time  to  time,  as  circumstances  contradict- 
ed his  first  expectations  and  gave  him  clearer  notions.  They  are  fur- 
ther refuted  by  the  entire  harmony  which  subsists  between  Christ's 
own  expressions  in  regard  to  his  plan,  as  uttered  in  the  two  different 
epochs  of  his  history. 


HIS  CONSCIOUSNESS  OF  MESSIAHSIIIP.  81 

§  49.  Connexion  tvlth  the  Old  Testament  Tlieocrac]). 
The  object  of  Christ  was,  as  he  himself  often  describes  it,  to  estab- 
lish the  kingdom  of  God  among  men ;  not,  as  we  have  shown,  after  a 
plan  of  man's  devising,  but  after  one  laid  down  by  God,  not  only  in 
the  general  developement  of  the  human  race,  but  also,  and  specially, 
in  the  developement  of  the  Jewish  nation,  and  in  the  revelations  of  the 
old  dispensation.  We  must,  therefore,  look  back  upon  the  Old  Testa- 
ment foundations  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  before  we  can  correctly  un- 
derstand the  plan  of  Christ  as  set  forth  in  his  acts  and  words.  The 
one  prepared  the  way  for  the  other.  In  the  former  it  was  outward  and 
confined  to  the  narrow  community  of  the  Jewish  people,  in  the  form 
of  a  state  founded  and  governed  by  Divine  authority  ;  in  the  latter  it 
was  to  be  universal,  all-embracing,  a  communion,  springing  out  of  the 
consciousness  of  God,  intended  to  be  the  principle  of  life  and  union 
for  all  mankind.  In  the  former,  the  Divine  law,  ordering  from  without 
all  the  relations  of  state  and  people,  governed  the  nation  through  or- 
gans appointed  by  God  and  inspii-ed  by  his  Spirit,  viz.,  priests,  kings, 
and  prophets.  But  this  idea  could  not  be  realized  ;  the  kingdom  of 
God  could  not  he  founded  from  icithout.  It  needed  first  a  proper  mate- 
rial ;  and  this  could  not  be  found  in  human  nature,  estranged  from 
God  by  sin.  The  history  of  the  Jewish  nation  was  designed  to  bring 
this  contradiction  out  into  clear  consciousness  ;  and  to  awaken  a  more 
and  more  vivid  anxiety  for  its  removal,  and  for  the  re-establishment  and 
glorification  of  the  Theocracy.  So  the  revelations  of  God  pointed 
more  and  more  directly  to  Him,  the  Messiah,  under  whose  dominion 
the  Divine  kingdom  was  to  be  exalted,  and  the  worship  of  Jehovah  to 
be  acknowledged  and  to  triumph  even  among  the  nations  so  long  es- 
tranged from  him. 

§  50.    Christ'' s  Steadfast  Consciousness  of  Ms  Messia/ishij}. 

And  Jesus  knew  and  testified  to  his  Messiahship  from  the  beginning, 
from  his  first  public  appearance  until  his  last  declaration,  made  before 
the  high-priests  in  the  very  face  of  death ;  although  he  did  not  always 
proclaim  it  with  equal  openness,  especially  when  there  was  risk  of 
popular  commotions  from  false  and  temporal  conceptions  of  the  Mes- 
siah on  the  part  of  the  people  ;  but  rather  gradually  led  them,  from  the 
acknowledgment  of  his  prophetic  character  (by  which,  indeed,  they 
were  bound  to  believe  in  his  words),  to  recognize  him  as  the  Messiah, 
a  Prophet  also,  but  in  the  highest  sense. 

In  this  respect  there  is  no  contradiction  whatever  between  the  Synop- 
tical Gospels*  and  John.  They  all  agree  in  stating  that  Jesus  spoke 
and  acted  from  the  beginning  in  consciousness  of  his  Messiahship  ;  and 
'  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke. 

F 


82  THE  PLAN  OF  CHRIST 

also  that,  as  circumstances  demanded,  he  was  sometimes  more  and 
sometimes  less  explicit*  in  regard  to  it.  Nor  is  John  silentt  about  the 
fluctuations  and  divisions  of  opinion  (easily  explained  on  psychological 
grounds),  even  among  the  more  favourably  disposed  portions  of  the 
multitude :  nay,  he  tells  us  that  some  of  the  Apostles  were  slow  to  be- 
lieve, and  wavered  in  their  faith.  All  this,  however,  does  nothing  to 
prove  similar  fluctuations  in  Christ's  conviction  of  his  Messiahship. 
According  to  Matthew,  Jesus  commenced  his  ministry,  like  John  the 
Baptist,  by  summoning  men  to  repentance,  as  a  preparation  for  the 
coming  kingdom  of  God.  But  this  by  no  means  implies  that  his  in- 
tention and  his  announcement,  at  the  beginning,  were  the  same  as 
those  of  the  Baptist.  It  was  necessary  for  him  to  take  this  starting- 
point,  as  he  joined  his  ministry  upon  John's  proclamation,  and  upon 
the  desire  for  the  manifestation  of  the  kingdom  of  God  which  it  had 
awakened,  in  order  to  purify  this  desire  and  direct  it  to  its  object,  the 
leal  founder  of  the  kingdom.  It  was  essential  to  awaken  and  preserve 
in  the  minds  of  the  people  a  sense  of  the  necessity  of  repentance  as  a 
condition  of  participation  in  the  kingdom,  and  the  first  starting-point  for 
a  clear  idea  of  its  nature.  After  this  general  summons  had  gone  be- 
fore, Jesus  could  prove,  by  the  impression  of  his  own  works,  that  the 
kingdom  had  really  been  manifested  through  him  (Matt.,  xii.,  28  ;  Luke, 
xvii.,  21).  The  proclamation  of  the  approaching  kingdom  and  the  an- 
nouncement of  Jesus  as  its  founder  and  central-point,  were  closely 
connected  together;  but  sometimes  the  one  was  announced  more  prom- 
inently, and  sometimes  the  other,  as  circumstances  might  demand. 
Compare  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  with  the  discourses  of  Christ  as 
recoi'ded  in  John's  Gospel. 

§  51.  No  alterations  of  Christ's  Plan. 
It  may  be  imagined,  however,  that  although  Christ  was  conscious, 
from  the  beginning,  of  his  calling  to  realize  the  idea  of  the  kingdom  of 
(lOD,  the  plan  of  his  work  may  have  been  modified  from  time  to  time 
according  to  the  varying  results  which  depended  upon  the  vacillating 
temper  of  the  public  mind ;  that  at  first,  perhaps,  he  hoped  to  find  the 
greater  part  of  the  Jewish  nation  ready  to  receive  him  ;  and  designed, 
under  this  supposition,  to  separate  the  incorrigible  from  the  bettor  part, 
and  collect  the  latter  into  a  Theocratic  community  under  his  govern- 
ment; and  that  he  expected  that  the  kingdom  of  God,  once  seated 
firmly  in  this  way,  would,  by  the  might  of  its  prevailing  spirit  of  Divine 
life,  by  degi-ees  transform  all  other  nations  into  the  same  kingdom.     In 

*  John,  viii.,  2') ;  X.,  Q4. 

t  John,  vii.,  40;  Matt.,  xvi.,  11  ;  John,  vii.,  12.  The  less  hostile  portion  of  the  people 
agreed,  at  fiiKt,  only  in  believing  that  Christ  had  good  intentions  and  was  no  seducer  of  the 
people. 


UNCHANGED.  83 

fact,  what  an  incalculable  influence  might  a  nation,  thoroughly  imbued 
with  the  spirit  of  Christianity  and  illustrating  Christianity  in  all  its  re- 
lations, exert  toward  the  moral  regeneration  of  the  rest  of  mankind ! 
A  light  indeed  would  it  be,  not  hid  under  a  bushel,  but  throwing  its 
beams  on  all  sides  into  the  surrounding  darkness :  the  salt  and  the 
leaven,  truly,  of  all  mankind.  And  some,*  in  fact,  assert  that  Christ 
cherished  these  hopes  when  he  first  appeared  in  public.  Hence,  say 
they,  the  joyous  feeling  with  which  he  announced  the  "  acceptable  year" 
in  the  synagogue  at  Nazareth  ;t  hence  his  purpose,  manifested  in  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  to  give  to  the  people  new  Theocratic  statutes  in 
accordance  with  his  higher  stand-point ;  hence  his  promise  to  the 
apostles  that  they  should  govern,  under  him,  the  new  Theocratic  com- 
munity ;:j:  hence,  too,  his  last  lamentation  over  Jerusalem,  that  he  had 
so  often  tried  to  save  the  nation  which  ought  to  have  submitted  to  his 
guidance.  All  which,  they  say,  presupposes  a  belief  on  his  part  that 
the  results  might  have  been  different  had  the  people  listened  to  his 
voice,  and  that  he  expected  more  of  them  to  listen  to  him  ;  that  the  aim 
of  his  ministry  was  altered  when  he  found  the  resistance  more  stubborn 
and  general  than  he  had  supposed;  and  that,  from  the  course  of  events 
themselves,  he  learned,  in  the  light  of  the  Divine  Spirit,  that  the  plan 
for  the  establishment  of  the  kingdom  of  God  which  the  Divine  counsels 
had  formed,  was  such,  that  he  himself  must  submit  to  the  power  of  his 
enemies,  and  rise  victorious  from  his  suffeiing?  ;  .while  the  kingdom  it- 
self was  only  to  advance  by  slow  degi-ees,  and  after  many  combats,  t(» 
its  final  triumph. 

Yet,  after  all,  these  reasonings  are  only  specious,  not  solid.  Even 
the  most  important  of  them  rather  opposes  than  sustains  the  theory 
they  are  adduced  to  support.  It  is  true,  there  is  such  a  thing  as  a  holy 
enthusiasm  for  a  Divine  idea,  which  is  blind  to  all  difficulties,  or  deems 
that  it  can  gain  an  easy  victory.  Such,  howevei',  was  not  the  enthusi- 
asm of  Christ  for  his  Divine  work  ;  on  the  contrary,  he  combined  witli 
it  a  discretion  which  fully  comprehended  the  opposition  he  must  en- 
counter from  the  prevailing  opinions  and  feelings  of  the  times.  He  was 
far  from  trusting  to  the  momentary  impulses  under  which  the  people, 
excited  by  his  words  and  actions,  sought  to  join  themselves  to  him.  He 
readily  distinguished,  with  that  searching  glance  that  pierced  the  depths 
of  men's  hearts,  the  few  who  came  to  him,  drawn  of  the  Father  and 
following  an  inward  consciousness  of  G-od,  from  those  who  sought  him 
with  carnal  feelings,  to  obtain  that  which  he  came  not  to  bestow.  How 
did  he  check  the  ardour  of  his  disciples,  when  he  rebuked  the  false 
self-confidence  inspired  by  a  transient  enthusiasm,  and  reminded  them 
of  their  weakness !     There  was  no  extravagance  in  his  demands  upon 

*  De  Wette  and  Hase.     Paulus,  also,  with  some  modifications. 

t  Luke,  iv.,  17,  seq.  I  Matt,  six.,  28. 


84  THE  TLAN  OF  CHRIST 

men ;  nothing  exaggerated  in  his  hopes  of  the  future.  Every  where 
we  see  not  only  a  conscious  possession  of  the  Divine  power  to  over- 
come the  world,  which  he  was  to  impart  to  humanity,  but  also  of  the 
obstacles  it  should  meet  with  from  the  old  nature  in  which  the  princi- 
ple of  sin  was  yet  active.  This  was  the  spirit  which  passed  over  from 
him  to  the  Apostles,  and  which  constituted  the  peculiar  essence  of 
Christian  ethics.  Christ,  while  as  yet  surrounded  only  by  a  handful 
of  faithful  followers,  describes  the  renewing  power  which  the  seed  that 
he  had  sown  would  exert  on  the  life  of  humanity  ;  yet,  brilliant  as  the 
prospect  is,  his  eyes  are  not  dazzled  by  it ;  he  sees,  at  the  same  time, 
how  impurity  will  mix  itself  with  the  work  of  God,  and  how  clouds 
will  obscure  it.  Could  He  whose  quick  glance  thus  saw  the  depths  of 
men's  hearts,  and  took  in  at  once  the  present  and  the  future,  who  knew 
so  well  the  corrupt  carnality  of  the  Jewish  nation  before  he  entered  on 
his  public  ministry,  so  far  deceive  himself  as  to  suppose  that  he  could 
suddenly  transform  the  larger  part  of  such  a  nation  into  a  true  people 
of  God  1  He  that  searched  men's  hearts  and  knew  what  was  in  man 
could  not  be  ignorant  that  his  severest  battles  were  to  be  fought  Avith 
the  prevalent  depravity  of  men  ;  and  in  connexion  with  these  struggles, 
how  natural  was  it  for  him  to  look  forward  to  the  death  which  he  should 
suffer  in  the  faithful  performance  of  his  calling  !  Even  at  an  early  date 
he  intimated  the  violent  death  by  which  he  was  to  be  torn  from  the 
happy  fellowship  of  his  disciples,  leaving  them  behind  him  in  tears  and 
sorrow.* 

His  temptation,  the  historical  truth  and  import  of  which  we  have 
shown,  makes  it  clear  that  he  had  decided,  before  he  commenced  his  pub- 
lic labours,  not  to  establish  the  kingdom  of  God  in  a  mere  outward  way 
by  miraculous  power.  And  this  is  further  shown  by  his  assigning,  in 
the  first  epoch  of  his  ministry,  to  John  the  Baptist,  whom  he  called  the 
first  among  the  prophets,  a  subordinate  place  in  relation  to  the  new  era 
of  religion  ;  for  this  could  only  have  been  done  in  view  of  John's  in- 
ability fully  to  comprehend  the  essential  feature  of  this  new  era,  viz., 
the  spiritual  developement  of  the  kingdom  of  God  from  within.     And, 

*  Matt.,  ix.,  15.  Hase  saj-s,  indeed,  that  these  words  do  not  uuply  necessarily  an  approach- 
ing violent  death,  but  might  be  uttered  in  view  of  the  common  lot  ofmoitaJs.  But,  in  the  first 
place,  Jesus,  if  he  applied  to  himself  the  Old  Testament  idea  of  the  Messiah,  could  not  believe 
that  he  would  be  torn  by  natural  death  from  the  Theocratic  community  which  he  should 
found  among  the  Jews,  and  thus  leave  it  to  the  direction  of  others ;  but  must  expect  (if  he 
liopcd  to  found  an  external  Theocracy)  always  to  remain  j)resent  as  Theocratic  king.  (This 
applies,  also,  to  what  Has^e  says  (2d  edit,  of  his  Lehen  Jesn,  p.  89),  in  opposition  to  his  pre- 
viously expressed  views.)  Again,  it  would  be  strange  indeed  for  a  man  of  thirty  to  ex- 
jiress  himself  to  older  men,  in  reference  to  the  common  end  of  mortals,  in  such  language  as 
tlie  following:  "Now  is  your  time  for  festal  joy;  for  when  your  fiiond  shall  be  removed,  it 
will  be  time  for  fsLsting  and  sorrow."  The  whole  connexion  of  the  passage  shows  that  Je- 
sus did  not  expect  to  part  from  them  under  happy  circumstances,  but  amid  many  conflicts 
and  sufferings. 


UNCHANGED.  e5 

again,  in  refei-ence  to  John  he  said,  "  Blessed  is  he,  whosoever  sJiall  not 
he  offended  in  me  ;''  evidently  presupposing  that  John's  Old  Testament 
views  would  be  offended  at  the  new  era ;  a  presupposition  which  re- 
fers to  the  new  spiritual  growth  of  the  Divine  kingdom.  It  is,  thei'e- 
fore,  undeniable  that  from  the  beginning  Christ  aimed  at  this  new  de- 
velopement  of  that  kingdom. 

We  find  further  proof  of  this  in  all  the  parables  which  treat  of  the 
jjrogress  of  his  kingdom,  and  the  effects  of  his  truth  ujion  human  nature, 
viz.,  the  parables  of  the  mustard  seed,  of  the  leaven,  of  the  fire  which 
he  had  come  to  kindle  upon  earth,  all  which  were  designed  to  illus- 
trate the  distinction  between  the  Old  Testament  form  of  the  Theocracy 
and  that  of  Christ;  to  illustrate  a  developement  which  was  not  at  once 
to  exhibit  an  external  stately  fabric  ;  but  to  commence  with  apparently 
small  beginnings,  and  yet  ever  to  propagate  itself  by  a  mighty  power 
working  outwardly  from  within  ;  and  to  regenerate  all  things,  and  thus 
appropriate  them  to  itself.  All  these  parables  presuppose  the  renewal 
of  human  nature  by  a  new  and  pervading  princijjle  of  spiritual  life  ; 
and  imply  that  the  kingdom  of  God  cannot  be  visibly  realized  among 
men  until  they  become  subjects  of  this  renewal.  To  the  same  effect 
was  Christ's  saying  (which  we  shall  further  examine  hereafter),  "  nei- 
ther do  men  put  new  wine  into  old  shins,  else  the  shins  breah  and  the  wine 
runneth  out."  He  who  uttered  such  truths,  involving  a  steadfast  and 
connected  system  of  thought,  could  not  have  set  out  with  the  purpose 
of  establishing  an  outward  kingdom,  and  have  afterward  been  induced 
by  circumstances  to  change  his  plan  in  so  short  a  time.  What  an  im- 
mense revolution  in  his  mental  habits  and  course  of  thinking  must  a 
few  months  have  produced,  on  such  a  supposition  !  It  would  be,  in- 
deed, a  gross  misapprehension  of  the  precepts  given  in  the  Sermon  on  the 
Blount  to  interpret  them  literally  as  laws  laid  down  for  an  outward  The- 
ocratic kingdom.  Such  an  interpretation  would  involve  the  possibility 
of  a  struggle  between  Good  and  Evil  in  the  kingdom  of  God  ;  such  as 
can  never  take  place  in  Messiah's  reign,  if  it  be  realized  according  to 
its  idea.  The  form  of  a  state  cannot  be  thought  of  in  connexion  with 
this  kingdom  ;  a  state  presupposes  a  relation  to  transgression ;  an  out- 
ward law,  the  forms  of  judicature,  the  administration  of  justice  are  es- 
sential to  its  organization.  But  all  these  can  have  no  place  in  the^c?-- 
fect  kingdom  of  Christ ;  a  community  whose  whole  principle  of  life  is 
love.  Laws  intended  for  \he  free  mind  lose  their  import  when  their 
observance  is  compelled  by  external  penalties  of  any  kind  whatever. 
More  of  this  view  hereafter,  when  we  come  to  treat  especially  of  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount. 

Nor  is  a  change  in  Christ's  feelings  to  be  in  any  v/ise  admitted. 
The  year  of  joy  [the  acceptahle  year,  Luke,  iv.,  19]  did  not  refer  to  the 
happy  results  which  he  hoped  to  attain,  but  to  the  blessed  contents  o*' 


86  THE  PLAN  OF  CHRIST. 

the  announcement  with  which  he  commenced  his  labours ;  the  substance 
of  the  message  itself  was  joyful,  whether  the  dispositions  of  the  people 
would  make  it  a  source  of  joy  to  them,  or  not.  And  even  on  his  first 
proclamation  at  Nazareth,  the  hostility  of  the  canially-minded  multi- 
tude could  have  enabled  him  to  prognosticate  the  general  temper  with 
which  the  whole  people  would  receive  him.  It  follows  by  no  means, 
from  the  wo  which  he  uttered  over  his  loved  Jerusalem  (Luke,  xiii.,  34, 
35),  that  he  had  hoped  at  first  to  find  acceptance  with  the  entire  nation, 
and  to  make  Jerusalem  the  real  seat  of  his  Theocratic  government.  Yet, 
although  he  could  not  save  the  nation  as  a  whole,  he  offered  his  warn- 
ings to  the  whole,  leaving  it  to  the  issue  to  decide  who  were  willing  to 
hear  his  voice. 

§  52.  Two-fold  bearing  of  the  Kingdom  of  God — an  inward^  spiritmil 
Power,  and  a  world-renewing  Poiver. 

There  are  two  sides  to  the  conception  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  as 
Christ  viewed  it ;  in  reference  to  its  ideal  and  its  real  elements,  which 
must  be  contemplated  in  their  connexion  with  each  other.  The  dis- 
courses of  Christ  will  be  found  every  where  to  contradict  a  one-sided 
view  of  either  of  these  elements. 

The  kingdom  of  God  was  indeed  first  to  be  exhibited  as  a  commun- 
ion of  men  bound  together  by  the  same  spirit,  inspired  by  the  same 
consciousness  of  God  ;  and  this  communion  was  to  find  its  central 
point  in  Christ,  its  Redeemer  and  King.  As  he  himself  ordered  and 
directed  all  things  in  the  first  congregation  of  his  disciples,  so  he  was 
subsequently  to  inspire,  rule,  and  cultivate  this  community  of  men  by 
his  law  and  by  his  Spirit.  The  revelation  of  the  Spirit,  shared  by  all 
its  members,  was  all  that  was  to  distinguish  it  from  the  world,  so  called 
in  the  New  Testament,  that  is,  the  common  mass  of  mankind,  as  alien- 
ated from  God. 

But  as  this  community  was  gradually  to  prevail  even  over  the  mass 
of  mankind  through  the  power  of  the  indwelling  Spirit,  it  was  not 
always  to  remain  entirely  inward  and  hidden,  but  to  send  forth,  contin- 
ually more  and  more,  a  renewing  influence ;  to  be  the  salt,  the  leaven 
of  humanity,  the  citij  set  vpon  a  hill,  the  candle  which,  once  lighted, 
should  never  be  extinguished.  And  Christ  was  gradually,  through  this 
community,  his  organ  and  his  royal  dwelling-place,  to  establish  his 
kingdom  as  a  real  one,  more  and  more  widely  among  men,  and  subduti 
the  world  to  his  dominion.  In  this  sense  were  those  who  shared 
in  his  communion  to  obtain  and  exercise,  even  upon  earth,  a  real 
world-dominion.  It  is  the  aim  and  end  of  history,  that  Christiani/y 
shall  more  and  more  become  the  world-governing  principle.  In  fine, 
the  end  of  this  developcment  appears  to  be  (though  not,  indeed,  simply 
us  its  natural  result)   a  complete  realization  of  the  Divine  kingdom 


AIMS  OF  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD.  87 

which  Christ  estabhshed  in  its  outward  manifestation,  fully  answering 
to  its  idea  ;  a  perfect  world-dominion  of  Christ  and  of  his  organs  ;  a 
world  purified  and  transformed,  to  become  the  seat  of  His  universal 
empire. 

So  did  Christ  intend,  in  a  true  sense,  and  in  various  relations,  tct 
describe  himself  as  King,  and  his  organs  as  partakers  in  his  dominion 
of  the  world.  It  was,  indeed,  in  a  real  sense  that  he  spoke  of  his 
KINGDOM,  to  be  manifested  on  earth.  And  as  he  was  to  build  up  this 
kingdom  on  the  foundations  laid  down  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  to 
realize  the  plan  of  God  therein  prefigured,  he  could  rightfully  apply  to 
himself  the  figures  of  the  Old  Testament  in  regard  to  the  progress  of 
the  Theocracy,  in  order  to  bring  the  truths  which  they  veiled  clearly 
out  before  the  consciousness  of  men.*  Although  his  disciples  at  first 
took  these  figures  in  the  letter,  still,  under  the  influence  of  Christ's  in- 
tercourse and  teaching,  they  could  not  long  stop  there.  And  not  only 
his  direct  instructions,  but  the  manner  in  which  he  opposed  the  idea 
of  his  spiritual  and  inward  kingdom  to  the  carnal  notions  of  the  Jews, 
contributed  to  give  his  followers  the  key  to  the  right  interpretation  of 
these  types  and  shadows. 

In  thus  comparing  Christ's  discourses  with  each  other,  and  in  the 
unity  of  purpose  which  a  contemplation  of  his  whole  life  makes  manifest, 
we  find  a  guard  for  all  after  ages,  against  carnal  misconceptions  of  hi.s 
individual  discourses,  or  of  separate  features  of  his  life.t  In  general, 
when  we  find  in  the  accounts  of  any  world-historical  man  such  a  unity 
of  the  creative  mind,  we  are  willing,  if  individual  features  come  up  in 
apparent  contradiction  to  the  general  tenor,  to  believe  that  he  was  mis- 
understood by  incapable  contemporaries  ;  or,  if  this  cannot  be  safely 
asserted,  because  the  contradictory  features  are  inseparable  from  others 
that  bear  his  unmistakable  impress,  we  endeavour,  by  comparing  his 
manifestations,  to  find  that  higher  unity  in  which  even  the  unmanage- 
able points  may  find  their  rightful  place.  Utterly  unhistorical,  indeed, 
is  that  perverted  principle  of  historical  exegesis  which  teaches  that  an 
original,  creative  mind,  a  spirit  far  above  his  times,  is  to  be  compre- 
hended from  the  prevailing  opinions  of  his  age  and  nation;  and  which 
presupposes,  in  fact,  that  all  these  opinions  are  his  own.| 

*  Some  suppose  that  evei-y  tliiug  in  Christ's  discourses,  as  reported  by  Matthew  and 
Luke,  in  reference  to  this  real  Theocratic  element,  is  to  be  ascribed  to  the  Jewish  views 
that  obscured  the  truth  as  uttered  by  Christ,  and  caused  it  to  be  reported  incon-ectly 
That  this  is  not  the  case  is  obvious  from  Paul's  plain  references  to  such  expressions  of 
Christ's,  e.g.,  1  Cor.,  vi.,  2. 

t  We  shall  speak  more  particularly  of  this  when  we  come  to  treat  of  the  mode  in  which 
Christ  trained  his  apostles. 

t  Conf.  what  Schhiermacher  says  (Hermeneutik,  s.  20)  of  "historical  interpretation," 
and  also  (s.  82)  of  the  "Analogy  of  Faith." 


THE  PLAN  OF  CHRIST 


CHAPTER  II. 

THE  PLAN  OF  CHRIST  IN  ITS  RELATION  TO  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 
IDEA  OF  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

The  question  now  arises,  in  what  relation  the  new  form  of  the  king- 
dom of  God,  according  to  Christ's  plan,  stood  to  the  Old  Testament 
form  thereof;  a  question  which  we  shall  have  to  answer  from  the  inti- 
mations afforded  by  Christ  himself.  Indeed,  it  has  already  been  an- 
swered by  our  remarks  upon  his  idea  of  the  kingdom  as  developing 
itself  from  within;  but  as  the  subject  has  its  difficulties,  and  especially 
as  some  have  tried  to  pi'ove  that  Christ  spoke  and  acted  at  different 
times  from  opposite  points  of  view,  we  must  examine  it  more  closely. 

§  53.   Christ's  Observance  of  the  Jewish  Worship  and  Law. 

No  question  can  arise  as  to  Christ's  intention  to  extend  his  kingdom 
abroad  among  the  pagan  nations ;  the  Messianic  predictions  of  the  Old 
Testament  had  already  intimated  the  general  diffusion  of  the  worship 
i>f  Jehovah;  and  John  the  Baptist  had  hinted  at  the  possible  transfer 
of  the  kingdom  of  God  from  the  Jews  to  the  heathen,  in  case  the  for- 
mer should  prove  to  be  unworthy  of  it.  And  what  was  afterward 
novel  to  the  apostles  was,  not  that  the  pagans  should  be  converted  and 
received  into  the  fellowshijj  of  the  Messiah,  but  that  they  should  be  re- 
ceived without  accepting  the  Mosaic  law.  It  was  against  the  latter 
view,  and  not  the  former,  that  even  the  strictest  Judaizers  objected. 
It  was  to  refute  this  that  the  Ebionites  appealed  to  Christ's  strict  ob- 
servance of  the  law,  and  to  his  saying,  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount, 
that  he  "  came  7iot  to  destroy,  hut  to  fulfil  the  laic^'  and  that  "  not  one  jot 
or  tittle  of  the  law  should  pass  away." 

We  must  not  oppose  this  doctrine  by  quoting  Christ's  declarations 
that  the  essence  of  religion  must  be  found  in  the  soul,  and  that  outward 
things  could  neither  cleanse  nor  sanctify  mankind  ;*  for  even  in  the  light 
of  the  Old  Testament  it  was  known  that  piety  of  heart  was  indispensa- 
ble to  a  true  fulfilment  of  the  law.  Christ  himself  appealed  to  a  pas- 
sage in  the  Old  Testament  (Hos.,  vi.,  6)  in  proof  of  this;  and  even  the 
well-disposed  scribe  (Mark,  xii.,  33)  admitted  it.  Still,  the  necessity 
of  an  outward  observance  of  the  law  might  be  maintained  by  those  who 
deemed  inward  purity  essential  to  its  value.t 

Viewing  the  relation  of  Christ's  doctrine  to  the  legal  stand-point  only 

*  Such  a.s  Matt.,  xv.,  11;  Mark,  vii.,  \'^. 

t  Even  Philo,  from  the  standpoiut  of  his  religious  idealism,  held  the  necessitj*  of  a  strict 
observance  of  the  ritual  law,  bcliovini,'  tliat  it  facilitated  the  understanding  of  tlie  spiritual 
sense  of  the  law.  He  asserted  this  against  the  idealists,  who  adhered  absolutely  to  the 
letter,  in  his  treatise  "X>e  Migrationc  Abi-cMvii." 


IN  ITS  RELATIONS  TO  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT.  69 

on  this  side,  we  might  conceive  it  to  have  stood  as  follows :  Direct- 
ing his  attention  only  to  the  necessity  of  proper  dispositions  in  order 
to  piety,  he  held,  as  of  fundamental  importance,  that  nothing  in  religion 
not  springing  from  genuinely  pious  feelings  could  be  of  any  avail ;  and, 
holding  fast  to  this,  did  not  investigate  further  the  question  of  the  con- 
tinued authority  of  the  ceremonial  law.  Satisfied  with  saving  what 
was  most  essential,  he  permitted  the  other  to  stand  as  inviolable  in  its 
Divine  authority.  Such  a  course  would  have  been  eminently  proper 
in  Christ,  if  we  regard  him  as  nothing  more  than  a  genuine  reformer. 
Every  attempt  at  true  reformation  must  have,  not  a  negative,  but  a  pos- 
itive point  of  departure ;  must  start  with  some  truth  which  it  fully  and 
necessai'ily  recognizes. 

The  view  which  we  have  just  set  forth  is  not  invalidated  by  Christ's 
denunciations  of  the  Phaiisees  for  their  arbitrary  statutes  and  burden- 
some additions  to  the  law.*  In  all  these  he  contrasted  the  law,  right- 
ly and  spiritually  understood,  with  their  false  traditions  and  interpreta- 
tions. As  for  actual  violation  of  the  law,  he  could  never  be  justly  ac- 
cused of  it ;  even  Paul,  who  so  strenuously  resisted  the  continued  ob- 
ligation of  the  law,  declares  that  Christ  submitted  to  it.t 

§  54.  His  Manifestation  greater  than  the  "  Temple.'" 
But  a  comparison  of  Matt.,  xii.,  6-8,  with  Mark,  ii.,  28,  will  suggest 
to  us  something  more  than  a  mere  assault  upon  the  statutes  of  the  Phar- 
isees. In  the  first  passage  he  begins  with  his  opponents  upon  their  own 
ground.  "  You  yourselves  admit  that  the  priests  who  serve  the  Tem- 
ple on  the  Sabbath  must  break  the  literal  Sabbatical  law  in  view  of  the 
higher  duties  of  the  Temple  service."  Then  he  continues,  "  But  I  say 
unto  you,  there  is  something  here  greater  than  the  Tcmpley\  In  these, 
as  in  many  of  Christ's  words,  there  is  more  than  meets  the  ear.§  When 
we  remember  the  sanctity  of  the  Temple  in  Jewish  eyes,  as  the  seat 
of  the  Shekinah,  as  the  only  place  where  God  could  ever  be  worship- 
ped, we  can  conceive  the  weight  of  Christ's  declaration  that  his  mani- 
festation was  something  greater  than  the  Temple,  and  was  to  introduce 

*  Matt.,  xxiii.  t  Gal.,  iv.,  4. 

X  I  prefer  Lachmann' s  reading  [utisov)  both  on  internal  and  external  grounds.  I  cannot, 
however,  believe,  with  De  Wette,  that  the  passage  refers  to  Christ's  Messianic  calling  alone; 
but  rather  to  his  whole  manifestation,  of  which  his  ministry  as  Messiah  formed  part.  Sim- 
ilar expressions  of  Clirist  refer  to  his  whole  appearance,  e.  "-.,  Matt.,  xii.,  8,  speaks  of  his 
person.     Conf  Luke,  xi.,  30. 

§  Justly  says  Dr.  von  Colin  (Ideen  ub.  d.  inneren  Zusammenhang  dcr  Glaubenseinigung 
und  Glaubensreinigung  in  der  evangel.  Kirche,  Leips.,  1824,  s.  10)  :  "  Every  religious  stu- 
dent of  the  Scriptures,  however  he  may  be  satisfied  with  the  sense  that  he  has  obtained 
from  them  by  the  aids  of  philosophy  and  history,  must  be  constrained  to  acknowledge  that 
the  simplest  words  of  the  Saviour  contain  a  depth  and  fulness  of  meaning  which  he  can 
never  boast  of  having  mastered."  These  holy  words,  containing  the  germ  of  an  unending 
developement,  could  only  be  understood  in  the  Spirit  (as  by  the  Apostles)  ;  and  they  who 
had  not  received  this  Spirit,  like  the  Judaizers,  who  adhered  to  the  letter,  could  not  but 
misunderstand  them. 


90  THE  PLAN  OF  CHRIST 

a  revelation  of  the  glory  of  God,  and  a  mode  of  Divine  worship  to 
which  the  Temple-service  was  entirely  subordinate.  We  may  infer 
Christ's  conclusion  to  have  been,  "  If  the  priests  have  been  freed  from 
the  literal  observance  of  the  Sabbath  law  because  of  their  relation  to 
the  Temple,  heretofore  the  highest  seat  of  worship,  how  much  more 
must  my  disciples  be  freed  from  the  letter  of  that  law  by  their  relation 
to  that  which  is  greater  than  the  Temple  !  (Their  intercourse  with 
Him  was  something  greater  than  Temple-worship.)  They  have  pluck- 
ed the  corn  on  the  Sabbath,  it  is  true,  but  they  have  done  it  that  they 
might  not  be  disturbed  in  their  communion  with  the  Son  of  Man,  and 
in  reliance  upon  his  authority.  They  are  free  from  guilt,  then,  for  the 
Son  of  Man  is  Lord  even  of  the  Sahbath."  He  thus  laid  the  founda- 
tion for  that  true,  spiritual  worship  to  which  the  Temj^le-service  was  to 
give  way. 

Of  the  same  character  were  those  words  of  Jesus  which  taught  a 
Stephen  that  Christ  would  destroy  the  Temple  and  remove  its  ritual- 
worship.  (Acts,  vi.,  14.)  Whether  he  learned  this  from  the  words  re- 
corded in  John,  ii.,  19,  or  from  some  others,  we  leiave  for  the  present 
undecided.  The  doctrine  of  Paul  in  regard  to  the  relation  between 
the  Law  and  the  Gospel  was  only  an  extension  of  the  truth  first  uttered 
by  Stephen.  This  doctrine  could  not  have  originated  in  Paul,  without 
a  point  of  departure  for  it  in  the  instructions  of  Christ  himself;  still 
less,  if  those  insti-uctions  had  been  in  direct  contradiction  to  it. 

Christ's  declaration,  "Mi/  yolce  is  easy  and  my  burden  light"  (Matt., 
xi.,  30),  was  designed,  indeed,  primarily,  to  contrast  his  manner  of  teach- 
ing and  leading  men  with  that  of  the  Pharisees ;  but  it  certainly  meant 
far  more.  It  contrasted  his  plan  of  salvation  with  legalism  generally, 
of  which  Pharisaism  was  only  the  apex.  Paul's  doctrine  on  the  sub- 
ject is  nothing  but  a  developement  of  the  intimation  contained  in  these 
words.* 

§  55.   The  Conversation  loith  the  Samaritan  Woman. 
We  have  thus  far  confined  ourselves  to  Christ's  declarations  as  given 

*  Schlciermacher  (in  his  Henneneutik,  s.  82)  very  aptly  applies  the  oft-abused  compari- 
son between  Christ  and  Socrates  to  illustrate  the  relation  between  the  apostolic  doctrines, 
especially  those  of  Paul,  and  the  immediate  teachings  of  Christ.  He  justly  remarks,  that 
while  there  was  a  similarili/  in  the  fact  that  the  teachings  of  Socrates  were  not  writteu 
down  by  himself,  but  transmitted  through  his  disciples,  who  marked  them  with  their  own 
individuality  without  at  all  obliterating  the  Socratic  ground-colours,  the  substantial  differ- 
ence lay  in  this,  that  the  affinity  of  the  Apostles  was  closer  than  tliat  of  the  followers  of  Soc- 
rates, "because  tlie  power  of  unity  which  emanated  from  Christ  was  in  itself  greater,  and 
acted  so  powerfully  upon  those  Apostles  who,  like  Paul,  had  marked  individual  jiecuhari- 
ties,  that  tlioy  appealed,  in  their  teachings,  exclusively  to  Ciu-ist.  Although  Paul  first 
brought  out  tlic  idea  of  the  conversion  of  the  heathen  into  perfect  clearness  before  the 
Apostles,  yet  he  advocated  it  in  no  other  power  than  that  of  Christ.  Had  not  the  idea  been 
contained  in  Christ's  teadiing,  the  other  Apostles  would  not  have  recognized  Paul  as  a  Chris- 
tian, much  less  an  Apostle."  The  same  remark  may  be  applied  to  many  other  important 
doctrines. 


FULFILLING  THE  LAW.  91 

by  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke,  avoiding  John,  because  the  credibility 
of  his  reports  of  Christ's  discourses  has  been  more  disputed.  But,  hav- 
ing shovv^n  the  tendency  of  Christ's  doctrine  of  the  Law  from  the  first 
Gospels  alone,  we  are  surely  now  entitled  to  appeal  to  his  conversation 
with  the  woman  of  Samaria  (John,  iv.,  7-30),  in  which  he  set  forth  the 
Christian  view,  that  religion  was  no  more  to  be  confined  to  any  one 
place.  In  fact,  the  discourse  involves  no  doctrine  which  cannot  be 
found  in  Christ's  declarations  elsewhere  recorded.  Perfectly  accord- 
ant witli  his  declaration  to  the  hostile  Pharisees  who  clamoured  so 
loudly  for  the  ritual  law — "  the  manifestation  of  the  Son  of  Man  is 
greater  than  the  Temple  ;  and  he  is  Lord  of  the  Sahhath'" — was  his  an- 
swer to  a  woman  (ignorant,  to  be  sure,  and  destitute  of  a  spiritual  sense 
of  the  Divine,  but  yet  free  from  prejudice,  and  susceptible  of  receiving 
instruction  from  him,  because  she  believed  him  to  be  a  prophet),  when 
she  inquired  as  to  the  right  place  to  worship  God  :  "  The  time  is  com- 
ing when  the  worship  of  God  will  be  confined  to  no  visible  temple ; 
for  the  hour  cometh,  and  now  is,  when  the  true  worshij^jfers  shall  worship 
the  Father  in  spirit  and  in  truth."  Tliis  declaration  could  only  have 
been  founded  on  the  fact  that  something  greater  than  the  Temple  had 
appeared  among  men. 

§  56.   The  ''Destroying'''  and  "■Fulfilling'''  of  the  haw. 

But  although  we  infer  that  Paul's  doctrine  of  the  disjunction  of  Chris- 
tianity from  the  Mosaic  law  was  derived,  mediately  at  least,  from  Christ's 
o\XT\  words,  we  must  admit  that  the  Judaizing  Christians,  unfit  as  they 
were,  from  their  Jew^ish  stand-point,  fully  to  apprehend  his  teaching, 
might  have  found  some  support  for  their  peculiar  opinions  both  in  his 
words  and  in  his  actions.  Take,  for  instance,  the  passage,  "  Think  not 
that  I  am  come  to  destroy  the  Laic  and  the  Frophets  ;  1  am  not  come  to 
destroy,  hut  to  fulfil."*  Their  Jewish  views  might  interpret  this  to 
mean  that  he  did  not  intend  to  abrogate  the  ceremonial  part  of  the 
law,  but  to  bring  about  a  strict  observance  of  it.  Nor  shall  we  apply 
here  the  distinction  between  the  moral  and  the  ritual  law ;  neither  the 
connexion  of  the  passage  nor  the  stand-point  of  the  Old  Testament 
would  justify  this.  Certainly,  as  he  used  the  terms  Law  and  Prophets 
to  denote  the  two  great  divisions  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  declared 
he  would  not  destroy  either,  he  must  have  had  in  view  the  entire  law ; 
it  was  the  law,  as  a  whole,  that  he  came  not  to  destroy,  but  to  fulfil. 

We  need  only  to  understand  correctly  what  kind  of  "destroying"  it 
is  which  Christ  disclaims.  It  is  a  "  destroying"  which  excludes  "  ful- 
fillinf ;"  a  destroying  which  is  not  at  the  same  time  a  fulfilling.  The 
general  positive  clause,  "lam  come  to  fulfil,^  is  used  as  proof  of  the 
special  and  negative  clause,  "  I  am  not  come  to  destroy  the  Law  and  the 
Prophets  ;"  nor  are  we  to  make  the  former  a  special  one,  by  seeking 

*  Matt.,  v.,  17. 


92  THE  PLAN  OF  CHRIST 

an  object  for  it  in  tlie  preceding  words.  On  the  contrary,  the  general 
proposition,  '^  I  am  come  to  fulfil^''  which  holds  good  of  Christ's  entire 
labours,  is,  in  this  case,  specially  applied  to  his  relation  to  the  Old  Tes- 
tament. Christ's  activity  is  in  no  sense  a  destroying  and  negative,  but 
in  every  respect  a  fulfilling  and  ci'eative  agency.  For  instance,  by  that 
agency  human  nature  is  to  lose  none  of  its  essential  features ;  but  only 
to  be  freed  fi"om  the  bonds  and  defects  which  sin  has  imposed  upon  it, 
so  that  its  ideal,  as  originally  designed  by  the  Creator,  may  become  the 
real.  This  is  Julfill ing  ;  but  yet  it  must  be  accompanied  by  the  destroy- 
ing of  whatever  opposes  it.  We  apply  the  same  principle  to  Christ's 
relation  to  the  Mosaic  law.  The  Mosaic  Institute,  as  the  fundamental 
law  of  the  sjjecial  Theocracy  exhibited  in  the  Jewish  nation,  was  a  veil, 
a  limited  form,  in  which  the  will  of  Gon,  the  eternal  law  of  the  Theoc- 
racy, was  appropriately  impressed  upon  the  men  of  that  time.  But  the 
general  and  eternal  Theocratic  law  could  not  find  its  free  developement 
and  fulfilment  in  the  form  of  an  outward  State  law.  The  law  (in  its 
whole  extent  I  mean,  including  what  is  called  in  a  narrower  sense  the 
moral,  as  well  as  the  ritual  law)  aimed  to  realize  the  will  of  God,  to 
present  the  true  diKaioovvr]  under  the  relations  above  defined.  But 
what  the  law,  in  its  whole  extent,  aimed  at,  is  accomplished  through 
Christ ;  the  veil  is  rent,  the  bonds  are  loosed  by  the  liberating  Spirit, 
and  the  law  reaches  its  before  unattainable  fulfilment.  This  fulfilment, 
indeed,  involves  the  removal  of  all  obstructions;  but  this  destroying 
process  cannot  be  called  destroying,  as  it  is  an  essential  condition,  and 
a  negative  element,  of  the  fulfilment  itself  So  the  fulfilment  of  proph- 
ecy in  the  manifestation  and  labours  of  Christ  necessarily  involved  the 
destruction  of  the  prophetic  veil  and  covering  of  the  Messianic  idea.* 

The  Ebionites,  adhering  only  to  the  letter,  misunderstood  Christ's 
declarations  on  this  subject ;  but  Paul,  viewing  them  in  their  true  spirit 
and  universal  bearing,  obtained  those  views  on  the  relation  of  the  Law 
and  the  Gospel  which  he  presents  in  such  passages  as  Rom.,  iii.,  31 ; 
viii.,  3,  4. 

^  57.  The  Interpolation  in  Luhe,  vi.,  4.  (Cod.  Cant.) 
There  is  a  traditional  account  of  another  remai'kable  saying  of  Christ 
in  regard  to  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath, t  viz.,  that  on  a  certain  oc- 
casion, seeing  a  man  at  work  on  the  Sabbath,  he  said  to  him,  '■'Happy 
art  thou  if  thou  knowest  what  thou  art  doing  ;  hut  ij"  thou  dost  not  hnoio , 
thou  art  accursed,  and  a  transgressor  of  the  lawT  We  must  not  leave 
this  unnoticed,  for  as  other  words  of  Christ  which  did  not  find  place  in 

*  We  shall  see  hereafter  how  this  interpretation  of  Christ's  words  is  verified  in  the  whole 
train  of  thought  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount. 

t  In  the  Cotl.  Cant.  (Cod.  Bezce),  this  passage  immediately  follows  Luke,  vi.,  4:  "rij 
avrri  'ifipf  ^caaiificvo?  Ttva  tpya'C.intvov  no  anGBiiTui  iIttcv  aiiTiTi-  livOpi-Ove,  el  (ilv  uiiai  t'i  TroitJj,  naKa 
fioitt'  tl  ii  itfl  olias,  iTTiKau'ipaTos  Kat  TtapaGaTtii  cl  rov  vd/xov.'" 


NOT  ALTERED.  93 

the  canonical  Gospels  were  handed  down  by  tradition,*  so  it  is  possible 
that  an  event  of  the  character  here  related  may  have  been  preserved  in 
some  collection  of  evangelical  traditions  (e.g.,  an  apocrvphal  Gospel  or 
some  other),  and  may  have  been  afterward  transferred  to  Luke,  vi.,  4, 
as  having  an  affinity  with  the  context  there.  There  is  nothing  in  the 
words  themselves  which  Christ  might  not  have  uttered  under  certain 
circumstances  ;  for  their  import  is  a  sentiment  which  he  always  made 
prominent ;  viz.,  that  all  depends  upon  the  spirit  in  which  one  acts. 
The  force  of  the  passage  is,  "  Happy  is  he  who  has  arrived  at  the  con- 
viction that  God  must  be  worshipped,  not  at  special  times  and  places, 
but  in  spirit  and  in  truth;  and  who  feels  himself  free  from  the  Old 
Testament  Sabbatical  law.  But  he  who,  while  acknowledging  that 
law,  allows  himself  to  be  induced  by  outward  motives  to  labour  on  the 
Sabbath,  is  a  guilty  man  ;  the  law  is  in  force  for  k/m,  and,  by  violatinor 
his  conscience  for  the  sake  of  an  external  good,  he  pronounces  his  own 
condemnation." 

It  is  quite  a  different  question,  however,  whether  this  naiTative  does 
not  bear  internal  marks  of  improbability ;  whether,  under  the  specified 
circumstances,  Christ  would  have  spoken  as  he  is  reported  to  have 
done.  First,  it  is  hardly  possible  to  imagine  that  any  one,  at  that  day, 
among  the  Jews  of  Palestine,  would  have  ventured  to  labour  on  the 
Sabbath.  Again,  it  is  hard  to  believe  that  Christ  would  have  pro- 
nounced such  labour  in  any  wise  good,  unless  it  were  performed  in  the 
discharge  of  a  special  duty.  Such  a  procedure,  more  than  any  other, 
would  have  laid  him  open  to  the  reproach  of  contemning  the  law.  He 
looked  upon  the  law  as  having  been  a  divinely  ordained  part  of  the 
developement  of  God's  kingdom,  and  as,  therefore,  necessaiy,  until  the 
period  when  the  new  form  of  that  kingdom  should  go  into  operation. 
Only  in  the  progress  of  this  new  form  was  the  abrogation  of  the  law  to 
follow  from  the  consciousness  of  redemption  through  Christ  j  and  then, 
indeed,  its  destruction  would  be  one  with  its  fulfilment ;  and  until  that 
point  of  progress  amved,  Christ  himself  set  the  example  of  a  conscien- 
tious observance  of  the  law.  He  opposed  the  Pharisaic  statutes,  indeed, 
but  it  was  because  they  took  the  law  in  its  letter,  not  in  its  spirit,  and 
surrounded  its  observance  with  difficulties.  He  made  it  a  fundamental 
point,  that  all  true  obedience  must  spring  fi-om  piety  and  love;  but  still 
it  was  obedience  to  the  law.  He  gave  therefore,  as  we  have  seen,  in- 
timations only  of  that  higher  period  in  which  the  law  was  to  be  done 
away ;  intimations,  moreover,  which  could  only  be  understood  throuo-h 
his  own  Spirit,  after  his  work  upon  earth  was  done.  Hence  he  cer- 
tainly could  have  pronounced  no  action  good  in  which  man's  will 
allowed  itself  to  anticipate  God's  order,  especially  an  action,  gi-ounded 
on  motives  understood  by  nobody,  which  might  have  injuriously  affected 

*  Acts,  XX.,  35. 


94  THE  PLAN  OF  CHRIST. 

the  religious  convictions  of  others.  Paul  lays  down  quite  a  contrary- 
rule  in  1  Cor.,  viii.  Nor  did  Christ  himself  act  in  such  a  way  in  other 
cases. 

Thei-c  is,  then,  very  poor  authority  for  this  passage,  either  internal 
or  external.  Its  invention  was  probably  suggested  by  the  words  of 
Paul  in  Rom.,  xiv.,  22,  23,  and  affords  a  very  good  illustration  of  the 
difference  between  mere  individual  inventions  and  the  genuine  his- 
torical traditions  of  the  Evangelists. 


AVe  close  our  survey  of  Christ's  sayings  in  regard  to  his  relations  to 
the  Old  Testament  with  a  remark  directly  suggested  by  it,  from  which 
the  weightiest  consequences  may  be  deduced. 

The  manner  in  which  he  contrasted  the  Old  Testament  with  its  ful- 
filment, the  New,  and  elevated  the  least  of  Christians  above  all  the 
prophets,  shows  how  clearly  he  distinguished  the  kernel  from  its  perish- 
able shell,  the  Divine  idea  from  its  temporary  veil,  the  truth  which  lay 
in  germ  in  the  Old  Testament,  from  the  contracted  form  in  which  it 
presented  itself  to  Old  Testament  minds.  Applying  this  general  prin- 
c-iple  to  individual  cases  as  they  arise,  we  may  learn  how  to  interpret, 
in  Christ's  own  sense,  the  figures  which  he  employed  to  illustrate  his 
Messianic  world-dominion.  In  this  way  some  of  the  results  at  which 
we  have  already  arrived  may  find  further  confirmation. 


CHAPTER  III. 

NEW  FORM  OF  THF   IDEA  OF  THE  PERSON  OF  THE  THEOCRATIC 

KING. 

§  58.   The  Names  Son  of  God  and  Son  of  Man. 

kUR  conception  of  \\\e  pcrso7i  of  the  Messiah,  as  Theocratic  King, 
is  closely  connected  with  that  which  we  may  entertain  of  the  king- 
dom of  God  itself,  and  of  its  process  of  developement.  In  reference 
to  both,  .Jesus  joined  himself  indeed  to  the  existing  Jewish  conceptions, 
but,  at  the  same  time,  infused  into  them  a  new  spirit  and  a  higher  re- 
generating element. 

Both  of  the  names  which  he  applied  to  himself — Son  of  God  and 
Son  of  Man — are  to  be  found  among  the  designations  of  the  Messiah  in 
the  Old  Testament ;  but  he  used  them  in  a  far  higher  sense  than  was 
current  among  the  .Tews.  He  obviously  employed  them  antithetically  : 
they  contain  coiTclative  ideas,  and  cannot  be  thoroughly  understood 
apart  from  their  reciprocal  relation.  It  is  clear  from  Matt.,  xvi.,  10  ; 
xxvi.,  G3 ;  John,  i.,  50,  and  from  all  that  is  known  of  the  current  thro 


THE  TITLE  "  SON  OF  MAN."  95 

logical  language  of  the  Jews  at  that  time,  that  the  name  "  Son  of  GotV 
was  the  most  common  designation  of  Messiah,  as  the  best  adapted  to 
denote  his  highest  dignity,  that  of  Theocratic  King.  The  name  "  Son 
of  Man'  involves,  indeed,  an  allusion  to  the  description  of  the  Mes- 
siah in  Dan.,  vii.  (further  illustrated  in  Christ's  last  words  before  the 
high-priests.  Matt.,  xxvi.,  64) ;  but  it  is  certain  that  this  name  was  not 
among  the  more  usual  or  best  known  titles  of  Messiah.  This  may  ex- 
plain why,*  when  Jesus  on  a  certain  occasion  had  stated  a  fact  in  regard 
to  himself  as  Son  of  Man  [viz.,  his  approaching  death]  which  did  not 
accord  with  prevailing  ideas,  that  his  hearers  began  to  doubt  whether 
he  did  not  mean  to  designate  by  that  title  some  other  person  than  the 
Messiah.  Tt  is  used  by  none  of  the  apostles  for  that  purpose;  and,  in- 
deed, nowhere  in  the  New  Testament,  except  in  the  discourses  of 
Christ  and  in  that  of  Stephen  (Acts,  vii.,  56) ;  and  in  this  last  case  it 
is  probable,  as  Olshaiisen  justly  remarks,  that  Stephen  had  an  immedi- 
ate and  vivid  intuition  of  Jesus,  as  he  had  seen  him  in  his  human  form. 

§  r59.  Import  of  the  Title  Son  of  Man,  as  used  hy  Christ  himscf. — 
Rejection  of  Alexandrian  and  other  Analogies. 

Christ  must,  therefore,  have  had  special  reasons  for  adopting,  with 
an  obvious  predilection,  the  less  known  Messianic  title.  Even  if  we 
were  to  grant  that  he  used  it  more  frequently  because  of  its  less  ob- 
vious application,  in  order,  at  first,  to  lead  the  Jews  gradually  to  rec- 
ognize hnn  as  Messiah ;  still  we  should  not  have  a  sufficient  explana- 
tion of  his  employing  it  so  generally  and  so  cmphatically.t  We  find  a 
better  reason  for  it  in  Christ's  conscious  relation  to  the  human  race ;  a 
relation  which  stirred  the  very  depths  of  his  heart.  He  called  himself 
the  "  Son  of  Man"  because  he  had  appeared  as  a  man  ;  because  he  be- 
longed to  mankind ;  because  he  had  done  such  great  things  even  for 
human  nature  (Matt.,  ix,,  8) ;  because  he  was  to  glorify  that  nature  ;  be 
cause  he  was  himself  the  realized  ideal  of  humanity .| 

*  John,  xii.,  34. 

t  I  must  differ  here  from  Scholtcn,  Lucke,  Von  Culii  (Bibl.  Dogru.,  ii.,  Ifi),  and  Slrauss 
(Leben  Jesn) ;  and  agree  with  Schleiermacher,  Tholiick,  Ohhausen,  and  K/ing'  (Stud.  u. 
Krit,  1836,  i.,  137).  Justly  says  Schleiermacher  of  the  title  "Son  of  Man,"  "  Christ  would 
not  have  adopted  it  had  he  not  been  conscious  of  a  complete  participation  in  human  nature. 
Its  application  would  have  been  pointless,  however,  had  he  not  used  it  in  a  sense  inappli- 
cable to  other  men ;  and  it  was  pregnant  with  reference  to  the  distinctive  differences  be- 
tween him  and  them"  (Dogmatik,  ii.,  91,  3d.  ed).  Certainly  there  is  manifest,  in  the  ofteji- 
repeated  expressions,  sayings,  and  proverbs  uttered  by  Christ,  more  the  impression  of  an 
original  and  creative  mind  than  a  mere  appropriation  of  what  might  have  been  given  to  his 
hand  by  his  age  and  nation.  It  is  one  of  the  merits  of  the  great  man  whoso  words  we 
have  just  quoted,  that  he  vindicated  this  truth  in  many  ways  in  opposition  to  a  shallow  the- 
ology. The  unclean  spirit  which  h^bauished  is  now  endeavouring,  with  seven  others 
worse  than  himself,  to  take  posseasioii  of  this  age,  in  which  endeavour,  please  God,  he  will 
not  succeed. 

t  Conf  Matt.,  xii.,  8;  John,  i.,  52;  iii.,  13  ;  v.,  27 ;  vi.,  53.  The  force  of  the  first  passage 
iu  John  (i.,  52)  is,  that  Christ  would  glorify  humanity  by  restoring  its  fellowship  with  celes 


96  THE  PLAN  OF  CHRIST. 

We  certainly  cannot  find  in  Christ's  use  of  the  title  any  trace  of  the 
Alexandrian  Theologoumenon  of  the  archetype  of  liumanity  in  the 
Logos,  of  Philo's  distinction  between  the  idea  of  humanity  and  its 
manifestation  (or  the  Cabbalistic  Adam  Cadmon)  ;  notwithstanding  it 
was  not  by  accident  that  so  many  ideal  elements,  formed  from  a  com- 
mingling of  Judaism  and  Hellenism,  were  given  as  points  of  depar- 
tui-e  to  the  realism  of  Christianity  ;  although  this  last  was  grounded  on 
the  highest  fact  in  history. 

So,  too,  the  fundamental  idea  of  the  title  "  Son  of  Man"  is,  perhaps, 
allied  to  that  involved  in  the  Jewish  designation  of  Messiah  as  the  "  sec- 
ond Adam  ;"  but  it  is  clear  that  Christ  was  not  led  by  the  latter  fact 
to  employ  it.  Much  rather  do  we  suppose  that  the  name,  although 
used  by  the  prophets,  received  its  loftier  and  more  profound  signifi- 
cance from  Christ's  own  Divine  and  human  consciousness,  independent 
of  all  other  sources  It  would  have  been  the  height  of  arrogance  in 
any  man  to  assume  such  a  relation  to  humanity,  to  style  himself  abso- 
lutely Man.  But  He,  to  whom  it  was  natural  thus  to  style  himself,  in- 
dicated thereby  his  elevation  above  all  other  sons  of  men — the  Son  of 
God  in  the  Son  of  Man. 

The  two  titles,  "  Son  of  God"  and  "  Son  of  Man,"  therefore,  bear 
evidently  a  reciprocal  relation  to  each  other.  And  we  conclude  that 
as  Christ  used  the  one  to  designate  his  human  personality,  so  he  em- 
ployed the  other  to  point  out  his  Divine ;  and  that  as  he  attached  a 
sense  far  more  profound  than  was  common  to  the  former  title,  so  he 
ascribed  a  deeper  meaning  than  was  usual  to  the  latter. 

§  60.  Import  of  the  Title  Son  of  God. 
(1.)  Jobu's  Sense  of  the  Title  accordant  with  that  of  the  other  Evangehsts. 
We  are  indebted  to  John's  Gospel,  more  than  to  either  of  the  others, 

tial  powers.  The  second  (iii.,  13)  imports  that  he  reveals  his  Divine  being  iu  human  na- 
ture, and  lives  in  heaven  as  man.  The  tijird  (v.,  27),  that  as  man  he  will  judge  the  human 
race.  The  fourth  (vi.,  53),  that  we  must  thoroughly  take  to  ourselves  and  be  penetrated  by 
the  flesh  and  blood  (i.  e.,  the  pure  humanity,  the  form  of  which  he  assumed  to  reveal  the 
Divine)  of  him  who  can  be  called  man  in  a  sense  that  can  be  predicated  of  no  other,  and 
who  himself  has  incarnated  the  Divinity.  (On  the  passage  from  Matt.,  see  p.  89.)  In 
Matt.,  ix.,  8,  there  is  in  the  statement  that  the  entire  human  nature  is  glorified  in  Chnst, 
an  intimation  of  what  is  expressed  in  the  title  "  Son  of  Man"  in  Christ's  sense  of  it. 

It  is  remarkable,  that  while  this  emphatic  title  of  the  Son  of  Man  appears  in  the  dis- 
courses of  Christ  both  in  the  synoptical  Gospels  and  .John,  that  its  deeper  sense,  although 
uot  to  be  mistaken  in  some  of  the  passages  in  the  former,  is  far  more  vividly  cxjircssed  in 
John.  Yet  if  it  were  the  case  (as  has  been  said)  that  .John,  following  tlie  prevalent  o[iinion, 
designed  to  represent  Jesus  as  the  Logos  appearing  in  humanity,  and,  leaving  the  human 
nature  in  the  back-ground,  to  present  the  Divine  consi)icuously,  he  could  not  have  nsed  tliis 
title  so  frequently.  There  is  no  trace  of  Alexanch^nism  in  John,  nor  can  his  preference 
for  the  expression  be  attributed  to  his  individual  jWuliarities,  for  there  is  notliing  of  the 
kind  in  his  Epistles.  The  only  individual  i)cculiarily  that  we  can  detect  in  John,  in  this 
respect,  is  his  susceptibility  to  im|)rcssion  from  certain  emi)hatic  expressions,  especially 
Buch  as  relate  to  the  person  of  Christ. 


THE  TITLE  "SON  OF  GOD."  97 

for  those  expressions  of  Christ  which  relate  especially  to  the  indwel- 
ling within  him  of  the  Divine  essence.  It  does  not,  however  (as  some 
suppose),  follow  from  this  that  John,  consciously  or  unconsciously,  re- 
modelled the  discourses  of  Christ  according  to  the  Alexandrian  theol- 
ogy. The  fact  may  be  explained  on  entirely  other  gi-ounds,  e.  g.,  his 
more  intimate  connexion  with  Christ,  and  the  peculiar  profoundness  of 
his  mind  ;  moreover,  the  discourses  recorded  by  him  are  longer  and 
more  consecutively  didactic  and  controversial  than  those  given  by  the 
other  Evangelists.  The  impartiality,  too,  with  which  he  sets  forth  the 
j)ure  humanity  of  Christ  is  sufficient  to  pi'ove  the  groundlessness  of 
such  a  reproach. 

If  we  can  only  find  individual  expressions  in  the  other  Evangelists 
which  involve  the  idea  of  the  "  Son  of  God"  in  John's  sense,  we  shall 
have  proved  satisfactorily  that  the  latter  was  derived  immediately  fiom 
Christ  himself  Now  Matt.,  xi.,  27,  "  No  man  knowetJi  the  Son  but  the 
Father,  neither  knowcth  any  man  the  Father  save  the  Son,'"  is  just  such 
a  passage.  It  intimates  precisely  such  a  mysterious  relation  between 
tlie  Father  and  the  Son  as  John  more  fully  sets  forth  as  imparted  to 
him  by  the  revelation  of  Christ.  So,  also,  the  question  propounded  by 
Christ  to  the  Pharisees,  "  What  think  ye  of  the  Christ?  whose  Son  is 
heV  could  have  had  no  other  object  than  to  lead  them  to  conceive 
Messiah  as  the  Son  of  God  in  a  higher  sense  than  they  were  accustom- 
ed to.  Again,  the  heathen  centurion  (Matt.,  viii.,  5),  who  deemed  his 
roof  unworthy  of  Christ,  and  begged  him,  without  approaching  his 
abode,  to  heal  the  siek  servant  by  a  word,  certainly  considered  him  as 
a  superior  being  who  had  ministering  spirits  at  command.  He  evi- 
dently did  not  form  his  idea  of  Christ  from  the  common  Jewish  concep- 
tions of  the  Messiah ;  on  the  contraiy,  his  explanation  (verse  9)  of  the 
impression  which  he  had  received  (either  from  the  accounts  of  others, 
or  from  personal  observation  of  Christ's  person  and  labours)  is  perfect- 
ly in  keeping  with  his  character  and  notions  while  as  yet  a  pagan.* 
But  Christ  (who  always  rejected  any  honours  that  were  ascribed  to  him 
from  erroneous  viewst)  not  only  did  not  correct  the  centurion,  but 
held  his  faith  up  as  a  model. 

In  a  word,  the  whole  image  of  Christ  presented  in  the  synoptical 
Gospels  exhibits  a  majesty  far  transcending  human  nature,  and  utterly 
irreconcilable  with  Ebionitish  conceptions.  A  manifestation  so  extra- 
ordinary presupposes  an  inward  essence  such  as  that  which  John's 
Gospel  fully  unfolds  to  us. 

(2.)  And  confirmed  by  Paul's. 
Nor  could  the  origin  of  PauVs  doctrine  of  the  person  of  Christ  be 

*  The  whole  account  Iiears  the  inimitable  stamp  of  historical  ti-uth. 
T  Luke,  xi.,  27  ;  xviii.,  19. 

G 


98  THE  PLAN  OF  CHRIST. 

explained,  unless  Christ  himself  had  given  statements  corresponding  to 
those  recorded  in  John's  Gospel.  So,  too,  the  various  theological  ten- 
dencies that  developed  themselves  after  the  apostolic  age  presuppose  a 
turn  of  thought  intermediate  between  that  especially  exhibited  in  Mat- 
thew and  that  of  Paul.  Precisely  such  an  intermediate  point  was  oc- 
cupied by  John.* 

*  Liicke  has  justly  remarked  upon  tlie  difference  between  the  classic,  creative  tenden- 
cies of  the  apostolic  times,  and  the  later  imitations  of  them.  The  dividing  line  between  the 
former  and  the  latter  is  distinctly  marked.  The  later  developement  of  Christian  doctrine 
presupposes  the  difl'ercnt  apostolic  types  of  doctrine,  and  among  them  that  of  John.  It  is, 
therefore,  utterly  mihistorical  to  seek  the  origin  of  such  a  Gospel  as  John's  iu  later  Church 
developements  (as  some  attempt  to  do).  The  latter  are  utterly  destitute  of  the  harmouions 
unity  of  Christian  spiritual  elements  that  distinguishes  the  former. 


PART    II. 

THE    MEANS    AND    INSTRUMENTS    OF    CHRIST. 


CHAPTER  L 

A.  THE  MEANS  OF  CHRIST  IN  GENERAL. 
§  61.  Christ  a  Spiritual  Teacher. 

AS  the  kingdom  which  Christ  came  to  establish  was  a  spiritual  one, 
Intended  to  develope  itself  outwardly  from  within,  so  the  means 
which  he  employed  in  its  foundation  were  entirely  of  a  spiritual  natui'e. 
In  his  declaration  before  Pilate,*  after  he  had  (1)  disclaimed  any  pur- 
pose of  setting  up  an  earthly  kingdom,  affirming  at  the  same  time  (2) 
that  he  was  King  in  a  certain  sense,  he  added  (3)  that  he  came  into  the 
icorld  to  testify  of  the  truth.  These  three  propositions,  taken  together, 
set  forth  his  purpose  to  found  his  kingdom,  not  by  worldly  means,  but 
by  the  testimony  of  the  truth.  But  he  testified  of  the  truth  by  his  whole 
life,  by  his  words  and  works,  compi'ising  the  entire  self-revelation  of 
Him  who  could  say,  "  1  am  the  Truth.''^ 

Inasmuch,  therefore,  as  he  himself  designates  the  testimony  of  the 
ti*uth  as  his  means  of  founding  his  kingdom  ;  inasmuch,  also,  as  he  ap- 
peared first  as  Prophet,  in  order  to  lead  those  who  recognized  him  as 
such  to  recofjnize  him  also  as  Messiah  and  Theocratic  Kinjr,  we  must 
treat  of  his  work  as  Prophet,  or  of  his  exercise  of  the  office  of  Divine 
Teacher,  as  the  instrument  by  which  he  laid  the  ground- work  of  his 
reign  among  men. 

§  62.  Different  Theatres  of  Christ's  Labours  as  Teacher. 
Christ  exercised  his  office  as  teacher  in  two  distinct  theatres,  Galilee 
and  Jerusalem ;  and  his  mode  of  teaching  varied  accordingly.  That 
carnal  mania  for  miracles  (directly  contrasted  by  Pault  with  the  Greek 
pride  of  reason)  which  infected  the  Jews  every  where,  whether  in  Gali- 
lee or  Jerusalem,  and  added  presumption  to  their  narrow-mindedness, 
proved,  indeed,  in  both  places,  the  greatest  hindrance  to  their  recep- 
tion of  the  words  of  Christ.  This  common  Jewish  feature  of  opposition 
to  the  spirit  of  Christ  justified  the  Apostle  John,  when  he  was  reviewing 
the  past  in  its  great  outlines,  in  embracing  not  only  the  dominant  Phari- 
saic party  at  .Jerusalem,  but  also  the  hosts  of  Galilee,  under  the  general 
conception  of  '\ov6aloi.\ 

*  John,  xviii.,  33-38.  t  1  Cor.,  i.,  22.  \  See  John's  Gospel,  passim. 


100  THE  MEANS  OF  CHRIST. 

Yet  as  the  people  of  Galilee  were  of  a  more  simple  turn  of  mind, 
and  were  less  subject  to  tlie  influence  of  Pharisaism  than  those  of  Je- 
rusalem, they  must  naturally  have  been  more  susceptible  to  his  instruc- 
tions. But  a  prophet  is  not  wont  to  be  held  in  honour  in  his  own  coun- 
try; nor  was  the  narrow-minded,  carnal  supranaturalism  of  the  Galileans 
likely  to  recognize  in  the  son  of  the  carpenter  of  Nazareth  the  man 
sent  of  God.  It  was  not  until  the  displays  of  his  power  in  the  metrop- 
olis of  the  Theocracy  had  revealed  him  in  a  higher  light,  that  he  found 
a  better  reception  on  his  return  to  the  villages  of  Galilee.* 

It  was  partly,  then,  in  Jerusalem,  where  the  Jews  gathered  together 
from  all  the  world  at  the  Passover,  and  partly  in  Galilee,  where  he  spoke 
to  the  people,  clustered  in  more  or  less  numerous  groups  about  him, 
especially  as  he  walked  along  the  shores  of  Genesareth,  that  the  scene 
of  his  labours  as  a  public  teacher  lay. 

§  63.  Choice  and  Training  of  the  Apostles  to  be  suhordinate  Teachers. 

Those  who  had  no  ear  to  hear  the  teachings  of  Christ  fell  off  one  by 
one,  and  left  around  him  a  narrow  and  abiding  circle  of  susceptible 
souls,  who  were  gradually  more  and  more  attracted  by  him,  and  more 
and  more  deeply  imbued  with  his  spirit.  A  closer  [the  closest]  circle 
still  was  formed  of  his  constant  companions,  the  Apostles.  As  the 
seed  which  he  sowed  was  received  and  developed  so  difierently  in  the 
soils  of  different  minds,  and  as  the  import  of  his  teaching  could  not  be 
thoroughly  comprehended  until  his  work  upon  earth  was  finished,  there 
was  danger  that  the  confused  traditions  of  the  multitude  would  hand 
down  to  posterity  a  ve.ry  imperfect  image  of  himself  and  his  doctrines, 
and  that  the  necessary  instrument  for  the  foundation  of  the  kingdom  of 
God,  viz.,  the  propagation  of  the  truth,  would  be  wanting. 

It  might  be  supposed  that  Christ  could  have  best  guarded  against  this 
result  by  transmitting  his  doctrine  to  all  after  ages  in  a  form  written  by 
himself.  And  had  He,  in  whom  the  Divine  and  the  human  were  com- 
bined in  unbroken  harmony,  intended  to  do  this,  he  could  not  but  have 
given  to  the  Church  the  perfect  contents  of  his  doctrine  in  a  perfectywrm. 
Well  was  it,  however,  for  the  course  of  developement  which  God  in- 
tended for  his  kingdom,  that  what  could  be  done  was  not  done.  The 
truth  of  God  was  not  to  be  presented  in  a  fixed  and  absolute  form,  but 
in  manifold  and  peculiar  representations,  designed  to  complete  each 
other,  and  which,  bearing  the  stamp  at  once  of  God's  inspiration  and 
man's  imperfection,  were  to  be  developed  by  the  activity  of  free  minds, 
in  free  and  lively  appropriation  of  what  God  liad  given  by  his  Spirit. 
This  will  appear  yet  more  plainly  hereafter,  from  the  principles  of 
Christ's  mode  of  instruction,  as  set  forth  by  himself  At  present  we 
content  ourselves  with  one  single  remark.     Christ's  declaration,  "J/  is 

*  John,  iv.,  44,  4.'j. 


HIS  MODE  OF  TEACHING.  lOl 

the  Spirit  tliat  quichcneth  ;  the  flesh  profiteth  notJiing"*  and  liis  em- 
phatic rejection  of  an  act  of  vvorship  that,  without  thought  of  the  Spirit, 
deified  only  his  outward  forni,t  may  serve  to  guard  all  after  ages  against 
that  tendency  to  deify  the Jhim  which  is  so  fatal  a  bar  against  all  reco"-. 
nition  of  the  essence.  What  could  have  contributed  more  to  products 
such  a  tendency  than  a  written  document  from  Christ's  own  hand  ? 

Since,  therefore,  Christ  intended  to  leave  no  such  fixed  rule  of  doc- 
trine for  all  ages,  written  by  himself,  it  was  the  more  necessary  for  him 
to  select  organs  capable  of  transmitting  to  posterity  a  correct  image  of 
himself  and  his  teaching.  Such  organs  were  the  apostles,  and  their 
training  constituted  no  unimportant  part  of  his  work  as  a  teacher. 


CHAPTER  IT. 

CHRIST'S  MODE  OF  TEACHING  IN  REGARD  TO  ITS  METHOD  AND  FORM. 

A.  GENERAL  PRINCIPLES. 
§  64.  His  mode  of  Teaching  adapted  to  the  Sitand-point  of  his  Hearers. 

WE  shall  first  seek,  in  the  intimations  of  Christ  himself,  for  the 
principles  of  his  mode  of  teaching,  and  the  giounds  on  which 
he  adopted  it. 

Such  an  intimation  may  be  found  in  Matt.,  xiii.,  52.  After  he  had 
uttered  and  expounded  several  parables  in  regard  to  the  kingdom  of 
God,  and  had  been  assured  by  the  apostles  that  they  understood  him, 
he  continued  :  "  From  the  example  I  have  given  you,  in  thus  making 
hidden  truths  clear  by  means  of  parables,  ye  may  learn  that  every  scrihc 
who  is  instructed  into  the  hingdovi  of  Heaven  is  like  a  householder,  who 
bringeth  forth  out  of  his  treasure  things  new  and  old^  As  a  house- 
holder shows  his  visitors  his  jewels;  exhibits,  in  pleasing  alternation, 
the  modern  and  the  antique,  and  leads  them  from  the  common  to  the 
rare,  so  must  the  teacher  of  Divine  truth,  in  the  new  manifestation  of 
the  kingdom  of  God,  bring  out  of  his  treasures  of  knowledge  truths  old 
and  new,  and  gradually  lead  his  hearers  from  the  old  and  usual  to  the 
new  and  unaccustomed.  Utterly  unlike  the  rabbins,  with  their  obstinate 
and  slavish  adherence  to  the  letter,  the  teachers  of  the  new  epoch  were 
to  adapt  themselves  fi-eely  to  the  circumstances  of  their  hearers,  and, 
in  consequence,  to  present  the  truth  under  manifold  varieties  of  form. 
Tn  a  word,  Christ  himself,  as  a  teacher,  was  the  model  for  his  disciples. 

As  the  passage  above  quoted  referred  primarily  to  the  paraholic 
mode  of  teaching  which  Christ  had  just  employed,  we  find  in  it  an  im- 

*  John,  >-i.,  63.  ■*  t  Luke,  xi.,  27. 


102  THE  MEANS  OF  CHRIST. 

portant  reason  for  the  frequent  use  which  he  made  of  figures  and  si- 
militudes. It  was,  namely,  in  order  to  bring  new  and  higher  truths 
vividly  before  the  minds  of  his  hearers,  by  means  of  illustrations  drawn 
from  objects  familiar  to  them  in  common  life  and  nature. 

But  the  passage  can  be  applied  also  to  many  other  features  of  his 
mode  of  teaching ;  for  instance,  to  his  habit  of  leading  his  hearers,  step 
by  step,  from  the  stand-point  of  the  Old  Testament  to  that  of  the  New  ; 
adapting  himself  to  the  old  representations  and  the  Jewish  modes  of 
thought  and  speech  derived  from  them  (especially  those  which  referred 
to  Messiah's  kingdom),  and  thus  imparting  the  new  spii'it  under  the 
ancient  and  accustomed  forms.  All  his  accommodation  to  forms  finds 
its  explanation  here, 

§  &!>.  His  Teaching  presented  Seeds  and  Stimttlants  of  Thought. 

Again,  he  told  his  disciples  (John,  xvi.,  25)  that  up  to  that  time  he 
had  veiled  the  truth  in  parables,  but  that  the  time  was  approaching 
when  he  should  declare  plainly  and  openly  all  that  he  had  to  tell  them 
of  his  Father.  He  thus  taught  them  that  they  would  be  enabled,  at  a 
later  period,  by  the  aid  of  the  illuminating  Spirit,  to  develope  from  his 
discourses  the  hidden  truths  which  they  enfolded.  It  must,  tlierefore, 
by  no  means  surprise  us  to  find  that  the  full  import  of  most  of  his  words 
was  not  comprehended  by  his  contemporaries :  such  a  result,  indeed, 
was  just  what  we  might  expect.  He  would  not  have  been  "  Son  of 
God"  and  "  Son  of  JMan,"  had  not  his  words,  like  his  works,  with  all 
their  adaptation  to  the  circumstances  of  the  times,  contained  some 
things  that  were  inexplicable  ;  had  they  not  borne  concealed  within 
them  the  germ  of  an  infinite  devclopement,  reserved  for  future  ages  to 
unfold.  It  is  this  feature  (and  all  the  Evangelists  concur  in  their 
representations  of  it)  which  distinguishes  Christ  from  all  other  teach- 
ei's  of  men.  Advance  as  they  may,  they  can  never  reach  him ;  their 
only  task  need  be,  by  taking  Him  more  and  more  into  their  life  and 
thought,  to  learn  better  how  to  bring  forth  the  treasures  that  lie  con- 
cealed in  him.* 

The  form  of  his  expressions,  whether  he  uttered  parables,  proverbs, 
maxims,  or  apparent  paradoxes,  was  intended  to  spur  men's  minds  to 
j)rofounder  thought,  to  awaken  the  Divine  consciousness  within,  and  so 
teach  them  to  understand  that  which  at  first  served  only  as  a  mental 
stimulus.  It  was  designed  to  impress  indelibly  upon  the  memory  of 
his  hearers  traths  perhaps  as  yet  not  fully  intelligible,  but  which  would 
gi-ow  clear  as  the  Divine  life  was  fijrmed  within  them,  and  become  an 
ever-increasing  source  of  spiritual  light.     His  doctrine  was  not  to  be 

*  Schlcicrmacher  says  beautifully  (Cliristliche  Sittenlehre,  p.  72),  that  all  our  progress  [in 
Divine  knowledge]  must  consist  solely  in  more  correctly  understanding  and  more  complete- 
ly appropriating  to  ourselves  that  which  is  iu  Christ 


HIS  MODE  OF  TEACHING.  103 

propagated  as  a  lifeless  stock  of  tradition,  but  to  be  received  as  a  living 
Spirit  by  willing  minds,  and  brought  out  into  full  consciousness,  ac- 
cording to  its  import,  by  free  spiritual  activity.  Its  individual  parts, 
too,  were  only  to  be  apprehended  in  their  first  proportions,  in  the  com- 
plete connexion  of  that  higher  consciousness  which  He  was  to  call  forth 
in  man.  The  form  of  teaching  which  repelled  the  stupid,  and  passed 
unheeded  and  misunderstood  by  the  unholy,  roused  susceptible  minds 
to  deeper  thought,  and  rewarded  their  inquiries  by  the  discovery  of 
ever-increasing  treasures. 

§  66.  Its  Results  dependent  upon  the  Spirit  of  the  Hearers. 

But  the  attainment  of  this  end  depended  upon  the  susceptibility  of 
the  hearers.  So  far  as  they  hungered  for  true  spiritual  food,  so  far  as 
the  parable  stimulated  them  to  deeper  thought,  and  so  far  only,  it  re- 
vealed new  riches.  Those  with  whom  this  was  really  the  case  were 
accustomed  to  wait  until  the  throng  had  left  their  Master,  or,  gathering 
round  him  in  a  narrow  cii'cle,  in  some  retired  spot,  to  seek  cleaver 
light  on  points  w'hich  the  parable  had  left  obscure.  The  scene  de- 
scribed in  Mark,  iv.,  10,  shows  us  that  others  besides  the  twelve  apostles 
were  named  among  those  who  remained  behind  to  ask  him  questions 
after  the  crowd  had  dispersed.  Not  only  did  such  questions  afford 
the  Saviour  an  opportunity  of  imparting  more  thorough  instruction,  but 
those  who  felt  constrained  to  offer  them  were  thereby  drawn  into  closer 
fellowship  with  him.  He  became  better  acquainted  with  the  souls  that 
were  longinor  for  salvation. 

The  greater  number,  however,  in  their  stupidity,  did  not  trouble 
themselves  to  penetrate  the  shell  in  order  to  reach  the  kernel.  _  Yet 
they  must  at  least  have  perceived  that  they  had  understood  nothing ; 
they  could  not  learn  separate  phrases  from  Clirist  (as  they  might  from 
other  religious  teachers)  and  thi7ik  they  comprehended  them,  while  they 
did  not.  And  so,  in  proportion  to  the  susceptibility  of  his  hearers,  the 
parables  of  Christ  revealed  sacred  things  to  some  and  veiled  them 
from  others,  who  were  destined,  through  their  own  fault,  to  remain  in 
darkness.  The  pearls,  as  he  himself  said,  were  not  to  be  cast  before 
swine.  Thus,  like  those  "  hard  sayings"*  which  were  to  some  the 
"words  of  Life,"  and  to  others  an  insupportable  "  offence,"  the  parables 
served  to  sift  and  purge  the  throng  of  Christ's  hearers. 

A  single  example  will  bring  this  vividly  before  us.     On  a  certain  oc- 
casion, when  Christ  had  pronounced  a  parable,  and  the  multitude  had 
departed,  the  earnest  seekers  after  truth  gathered  about  him  to  ask  its 
interpretation.t      He  expressed  his  gratification  at  their  eagerness  tu 
*  Jobn,  vi.,  60.  t  Luke,  viii.,  10;  Mark,  iv.,  11. 


104  THE  MEANS  OF  CHRIST. 

learn  the  true  sense  of  his  words,  and  said  :  "  Unto  you  it  is  given*  to 
know  the  mysteries  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  hut  to  others  in  parables 
[without  the  explanations  that  are  given  to  susceptible  minds],  that 
they  may  see  with  their  eyes,  and  yet  not  see ;  that  they  may  hear 
with  their  ears,  and  yet  not  hear."  There  is  here  expressed  a  moral 
necessity,  a  judgment  of  God,  that  those  who  were  destitute  of  the 
right  will  (on  which  all  depends,  and  without  which  the  Divine  "  draw- 
ing" is  in  vain),  could  understand  nothing  of  the  things  of  the  Lord 
which  they  saw  and  heard.  So  long  as  they  remained  as  they  wein?, 
the  whole  life  of  Christ,  according  to  the  same  general  law,  remained 
to  them  an  inexplicable  parable. t  It  is  worthy  of  remark,  that  "the 
others, ^^  with  whom  Luke  contrasts  the  inquiring  disciples,  are  styled  by 
Mark  (iv.,  11)  "those  that  are  without."  The  simplest  way  to  inter- 
pret this  phrase  is  to  apply  it  to  those  who  did  not  enter  to  ask  a  solu- 
tion of  what  they  had  not  understood ;  it  may  mean  those  who  were 
outside  of  the  narrower  fellowship  around  Christ;  but  in  either  sense 
the  result  is  the  same.| 

"  The  mystery,"  in  the  passage  above  quoted,  is  something  hidden 
from  men  of  worldly  minds ;  incomprehensible  to  them,  and  to  all 
who  are  excluded,  by  their  spirit  and  disposition,  from  the  kin<Tdom  of 
(xod.  And  this  is  the  case  with  all  truths  that  relate  to  that  kingdom, 
however  simple  and  clear  they  may  seem  to  those  whose  inner  life  has 
made  them  at  home  in  it. 

After  Christ  had  explained  the  parable  to  his  disciples,  he  took  oc- 

*  /.  e.,  they  followed  the  inward  "  drawing  of  God  (John,  vi.,  44,  45),  and  thence  becamt^ 
susceptible  of  Divine  impressions. 

t  According-  to  Mark  and  Luke,  the  disciples  asked  of  Christ  the  meanings  of  the  para- 
ble ;  according  to  Mattliew  (xiii.,  10),  they  inquired  whi/  he  spoke  to  the  multitude  in  para- 
bles. In  Luke  there  is  only  an  allusion  to  Isai.,  \-i.,  9 ;  in  Matthew  the  passage  is  cited  in 
full.  In  both  respects  the  statement  in  Mark  and  Luke  seems  to  be  the  more  simple  and 
original.  The  apostles  had  more  reason  to  ask  the  raeanhig  of  the  parables  than  to  find 
out  Christ's  motive  for  uttering  them  ;  yet  as  Christ,  in  reply,  did  state  that  motive,  it  was 
perhaps  implied  iu  the  question.  The  full  quotation  of  the  passage  in  Isaiah  was  a  natu- 
ral change,  and  accorded  with  Matthew's  habit.  The  connexion  is  well  preserved  in  M:it- 
thew,  and  the  difference  between  his  statement  and  the  others  is  merely  formal ;  nor  i.s 
there  the  slightest  ground  to  suppose  that  the  author  of  Matthew  simply  worked  out  Mark's 
account  or  some  other  which  lay  before  him.  It  goes  on  naturally  thus  :  in  answer  to  the 
question  7ohi/  he  spoke  to  the  multitude  in  parables,  Chi-ist  replied  (v.  11),  that  it  was  not 
given  to  them,  as  to  the  disciples,  to  know  the  mysteries  of  the  kingdom  of  God  ;  the  rid 
son,  founded  in  their  moral  dispositions,  is  stated  in  v.  12 ;  and  then,  in  v.  13,  the  Divine 
sentence,  that  "on  account  of  their  stupidity  he  spoke  to  them  only  iu  parables.'''  There 
is  nothing  inconsistent  here,  nor  is  any  arbitrary-  procedure  attributed  to  Christ;  for,  in 
fact,  the  parables  served  to  veil  as  well  as  to  reveal;  and  they  did  the  one  or  the  otlicr,  ac 
cording  to  the  moral  disposition  of  those  that  heard  them. 

t  Whatever  may  have  been  the  original  expression  of  Christ  in  this  passage,  the  fact 
that  Luke  speaks  of  "mysteries"  in  the  plural,  and  Mark  of  "mystery"  in  the  singular. 
contributes,  at  any  rate,  to  its  elucidation.  We  have  here  another  proof  that  the  germs  of 
Paul's  teaching  are  to  be  found  in  the  discourses  of  Christ :  this  passage  contains  Paul's 
whole  doctrine  of  the  relation  of  the  natural  mind  to  the  knowledge  of  Divine  Ihinjjs;  e.g.. 
1  Cor.,  ii.,  14. 


HIS  MODE  OF  TEACHING.  105 

casi'on,  from  this  particular  ease,  to  impress  ujjon  them  the  general  les- 
son that  every  thing  depended  on  the  spirit  in  which  they  received  his 
words.  He  came  not  (he  told  them)  to  hide  his  light,  but  to  enlighten 
the  darkness  of  men.  It  was  his  calling  to  be  the  Light  of  the  world 
(Mark,  iv.,  21).  (He  spoke  in  order  to  reveal  the  truth,  not  to  hide  it.) 
The  truth  which  he  had  obscurely  intimated  was  to  unfold  itself  for  the 
instruction  of  all  mankind  (v.  22  ;  cf  John,  xvi.,  25).  Yet  the  organs 
who  were  destined  to  unfold  it  must  have  "■  hearing  ears"  (v.  23). 
And  he  proceeds  (v.  24),  "  Take  heed,  therefore,  what  ye  hear  (be 
not  like  the  stupid  multitude,  who  perceive  only  the  outward  word) ; 
and  unto  you  that  hear  shall  more  he  given  (my  revelations  to  you  will 
increase  in  proportion  to  the  susceptibility  with  which  you  appropri- 
ate the  truths  which  I  have  intimated)."  And  he  concludes  with  the 
general  law,*  "Whosoever  has — in  reality  has — whosoever  has  made 
to  himself  a  /u-m^  possession  of  the  truths  which  he  has  heard,  to  him 
shall  more  be  ever  given.  But  he  that  has  received  it  only  as  some- 
thing dead  and  outward,  shall  lose  even  that  which  he  seems  to  have, 
but  really  has  not."t  His  knowledge,  unspiritual  and  dead,  will  turn 
out  to  be  worthless — the  shell  without  the  kernel. 

Some  have  supposed  that  these  words  (v.  25)  were  merely  a  prov- 
erb of  common  life,  of  which  Christ  made  a  higher  application.  But 
the  proofs  that  have  been  offeredf  in  favour  of  the  existence  of  such  a 
proverb  are  by  no  means  to  the  point;  and,  in  fact,  it  would  be  hardly 
true  applied  to  temporal  possessions,  for  the  poor  man  can  increase 
his  small  store  by  industry  and  prudence ;  and  the  rich,  without  those 
qualities,  may  soon  lose  his  heaped-up  treasures.  The  saying  is  fully 
true  only  in  an  ethical  sense  ;  it  speaks  of  moral,  and  not  material  pos- 
sessions. Applied,  however,  as  a  proverb,  it  must  refer,  not  to  mere 
possession,  but  to  property  held  as  such,  and  can  only  mean  that  he 
who  holds  property,  as  his  oicn,  will  not  keep  it  as  dead  capital,  but 
gain  more  with  it ;  while  be,  on  the  other  hand,  who  does  not  know 
how  to  use  what  he  has,  will  lose  it.  Thus  understood,  the  words  are 
not  only  fully  applicable  to  the  special  case  before  us,  but  also  to  mani- 
fold relations  in  the  sphere  of  moral  life. 

The  apostles  had  as  yet,  in  their  intercourse  with  their  Master,  re- 
ceived but  little;  but  that  little  was  imprinted  on  their  hearts.  They 
did  not,  like  the  multitude,  receive  the  word  only  by  the  hearing  of 
the  ear,  but  made  it  thoroughly  and  spiritually  their  own.  And  thus 
was  laid  within  them  the  foundation  of  Christian  progress. 

*  Mark,  iv.,  25  ;  Luke,  viii.,  18 ;  Matt.,  xiii.,  12. 

t  I  must  hold  8  ioKcl  Ixuv  to  be  the  true  readiug  of  Luke,  viii.,  18,  in  spite  of  what  De 
Wette  says  to  the  contrary.  \  Conf.  Wetstein  on  Matt.,  xiii.,  12. 


106  THE  MEANS  OF  CHRIST. 

§  67.  His  Mode  of  Teaching  corresponds  to  the  General  Law  of 
Developevient  of  the  Kingdom  of  God. 

It  was,  then,  according  to  Christ's  own  words,  a  peculiar  aim  and 
law  of  his  teaching,  to  awaken  a  sense  for  Divine  tilings  in  the  hu- 
man mind,  and  to  make  further  communications  in  proportion  to  the  de- 
gree of  living  appropriation  that  might  be  made  of  what  was  given. 
And  this  corresponds  with  the  general  laws  established  by  Christ  for 
the  developement  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  It  is  his  law,  that  choice 
must  be  made,  by  the  free  determination  of  the  will,  between  God  and 
the  world,  before  the  susceptibility  fur  Divine  things  (which  may  exist 
even  in  the  as  yet  fettered  soul,  if  it  incline  towards  God),  and  the 
emotions  of  love*  for  the  Divine  which  springs  from  that  susceptibility, 
can  arise  in  the  human  heart.  The  heart  tends  to  the  jioint  from 
whence  it  seeks  its  treasure  (its  highest  good).t  The  sense  for  the 
Divine,  the  inward  light,  must  shine.  If  worldly  tendencies  extinguish 
it,  the  darkness  must  be  total.  Christ's  words,  Christ's  manifestation, 
can  find  no  entrance.  The  Divine  light  streams  forth  in  vain  if  the 
light-perceiving  eye  of  the  soul  is  darkened.^  The  parable  of  the 
sower  vividly  sets  forth  the  necessity  of  a  susceptible  soil,  before  the 
seed  of  the  Word  can  germinate  and  bring  forth  fruit.  And  so  he 
constantly  assured  the  carnal  Jews  that  they  could  not  understand  him 
in  their  existing  state  of  mind.  He  who  will  not  follow  the  Divine 
"  drawing"  (revealed  in  his  dawning  consciousness  of  God)  can  never 
attain  to  faith  in  Christ,  and  must  feel  himself  repelled  from  his  words. 
The  carnal  mind  can  find  nothing  in  him.§  The  for7?i  of  his  language 
(so  he  told  those  who  took  offence  at  it||)  appeared  incomprehensible, 
because  its  import,  the  truth  of  God,  could  not  be  apprehended  by 
souls  estranged  from  Him.  The  form  and  the  substance  were  alike 
paradoxical  to  them.  The  uncongenial  soul  found  his  mode  of  speak- 
ing strange  and  foreign  ;  it  is  foreign  no  more  when  the  spirit,  throucrh 
its  newly-roused  sense  for  the  Divine,  yields  itself  up  to  the  higher 
Spirit.  The  words  can  be  understood  only  by  those  who  have  a  sym- 
pathy for  the  spirit  and  the  substance. 

Thus,  then,  the  other  Evangelists  agiee  with  John  in  regard  to  the 
fundamental  principles  of  Christ's  mode  of  teaching. 

*  Pascal  (Art  de  Persuader),  "  qu'il  faut  aimer  les  choses  divines,  pour  les  coniiaitre.  ' 
Beautifully  said.  t  Matt.,  vi.,  21. 

X  Luke,  xii.,  34;  Matt.,  vi.,  22.  $  John,  vi.,  44. 

II  John,  viii.,  33,  44.  In  v.  43,  XaXia  expresses  the  mode  of  speaking.  The  substance  it 
expressed  by  Arfyoj.    See  Lacke's  excellent  remarks  on  the  passage. 


PARABLES.  107 

B.  CHRIST'S  USE  OF  PARABLES. 

§  68.  Idea  of  the  Parable. — Distinction  between  Parable,  Fable,  and 

My  thus. 

Without  doubt  the  form  of  Christ's  communications  was  in  some  de- 
gree determined  by  the  mental  peculiarities  of  the  people  among  whom 
lie  laboured,  viz.,  the  Jews  and  Orientals.  We  may  find  in  this  one 
reason  for  his  use  of  parables;  and  we  must  esteem  it  asamark  of  his 
freedom  of  mind  and  creative  originality,  that  he  so  adapted  to  his  own 
purposes  a  form  of  instruction  that  was  especially  current  amono-  the 
.Tews.  But  yet  his  whole  method  of  teaching,  as  we  have  already  set 
it  forth,  would  have  led  him,  independently  of  his  relations  to  the  peo- 
ple around  him,  to  adopt  this  mode  of  communicating  truth.  Not  in- 
aptly has  one  of  the  old  writers  compared  the  parables  of  Christ's  dis- 
courses to  the  parabolic  character  of  his  whole  manifestation,  repre- 
senting, as  it  did,  the  supernatural  in  a  natural  form.* 

We  may  define  the  parables  as  representations  through  which  the 
ti'uths  pertaining  to  the  kingdom  of  God  are  vividly  exhibited  by  means 
of  special  relations  of  common  life,  taken  either  from  nature  or  the 
world  of  mankind.  A  general  truth  is  set  forth  under  the  likeness  of 
a  particular  fact,  or  a  continuous  narrative,  commonly  derived  from  tlio 
lower  sphere  of  life  ;  the  operations  of  nature,  and  the  qualities  of  in- 
ferior animals,  or  the 'acts  of  men  in  their  mutual  relations  with  each 
other,  being  assumed  as  the  basis  of  the  representation.  Those  para- 
bles which  are  derived  entirely  from  the  sphere  of  nature  ai-e  ground- 
ed on  the  typical  relations  that  existt  between  Nature  and  Spirit.  So, 
in  the  vine  and  its  branches,  Christ  finds  a  type  of  the  relation  between 
himself  and  those  who  are  members  of  his  body.  He  is  the  true  Vine. 
The  law  whose  reality  finds  place  in  the  spiritual  life  is  only  imaged 
and  typified  in  nature. 

Even  though  the  fable  be  so  defined  as  to  be  incluJed  in  the  para- 
ble, as  the  species  is  comprehended  in  the  genus,  still  the  latter,  espe- 
cially as  Christ  employs  it,  has  always  its  own  distinctive  character- 
istics. The  parable  is  allied  to  the  fable,  as  used  by  ^sop,  so  far  forth 
as  both  differ  from  the  Mythus  (an  unconscious  invention),  by  eraploy- 
ino-  statements  of  fact,  not  pretended  to  be  historical,  merely  as  covei'- 
jn«^s  for  the  exhibition  of  a  general  truth  ;  the  latter  only  being  present- 
ed to  the  mind  of  the  hearer  or  reader  as  real.  But  the  parable  is  dis- 
tinguished from  the  fable  by  this,  that  in  the  latter,  qualities  or  acts  of 

*  Airfn  Koi  S  Kvptos  ovK  S)v  KoaniKoi,  J){  KooittKo;  eU  avdpioiTovs  riXOev.     Strom.,  vi.,  677. 

t  •'  It  can  readily  be  shown  that  the  parables,  as  used  by  Christ,  had  the  significance  of 
their  types.  Nature,  as  she  has  disclosed  herself  to  the  mind  of  man,  must  in  thorn  bear 
witness  of  Spirit."  Steffcns  (Religionsphilosophie,  i.,  146).  And  so  Schelling,  on  the  relation 
between  Nature  and  History,  "They  are  to  each  other  parable  and  interpretation."  (Phi 
los.  Schriften,  1809,  457.) 


108  THE   MEANS  OF  CHRIST. 

a  higher  class  of  behigs  may  be  attributed  to  a  lower  {e.g.,  those  of  men 
to  brutes) ;  while  in  the  former,  the  lower  sjjhere  is  kept  perfectly  dis- 
tinct from  the  higher  one  which  it  serves  to  illustrate.  The  beings 
and  powers  thus  introduced  always  follow  the  law  of  their  nature,  but 
their  acts,  according  to  this  law,  are  used  to  figure  those  of  a  higher 
race.  The  fable  cannot  be  true  according  to  its  form,  c.  g.,  when 
brutes  are  introduced  thinking,  speaking,  and  acting  like  men  ;  but 
the  representations  of  the  parable  always  correspond  to  the  facts  of 
nature,  or  the  occurrences  of  civil  and  domestic  life,  and  remind  the 
hearer  of  events  and  phenomena  within  his  own  experience.  The 
mere  introduction  of  brutes,  as  personal  agents,  in  the  fable,  is  not 
sufficient  to  distinguish  it  from  the  parable,  which  may  make  use 
of  the  same  contrivance  ;  as,  for  instance,  indeed,  Christ  employs 
the  sJieej?  in  one  of  his  parables.  The  gi-eat  distinction  here,  also,  lies 
in  what  has  already  been  remarked ;  brutes  introduced  in  the  parable 
act  according  to  the  law  of  their  nature,  and  the  two  spheres  of  nature 
and  the  kingdom  of  God  are  carefully  separated  from  each  other. 
Hence  the  reciprocal  relations  of  brutes  to  each  other  are  not  made 
use  of,  as  these  could  furnish  no  appropriate  image  of  the  relation  be- 
tween man  and  the  kingdom  of  God.  And  as  the  lower  animals  are,  by 
an  impulse  of  their  nature,  attached  to  man  as  a  being  of  a  higher  or- 
der, Divine,  as  it  were,  in  comparison  to  themselves,  and  destined  to 
rule  over  them,  the  relations  between  man  and  this  inferior  race  may 
serve  very  well  to  illustrate  the  still  higher  relations  of  the  former  to 
the  kingdom  of  Gon  and  the  Saviour.  Thus,  for  instance,  Christ  em- 
ploys the  connexion  of  s/iccj?  and  the  shepherd  to  give  a  vivid  image  of 
the  relations  of  human  souls  to  their  Divine  guide. 

There  is  ground  for  this  distinction  between  parable  and  fable,  both 
in  the  J'o?-m  and  in  the  substance.  In  the  form,  because  the  parable  in- 
tends that  the  objects  of  nature  and  the  occurrences  of  every-day  life 
shall  be  associated  with  higher  truths,  and  thus  not  only  illustrate  them, 
but  preserve  them  constantly  in  the  memory.  In  the  substance,  be- 
cause, although  single  acts  of  domestic  or  social  virtue  might  find  points 
of  likeness  in  the  qualities  of  the  lower  animals  (not  morality  in  gen- 
eral, for  this,  like  religion,  is  too  lofty  to  be  thus  illustrated),  the  dig- 
nity of  the  sphere  of  Divine  hfe  would  be  essentially  lowered  by  transfer- 
ring it  to  a  class  of  beings  entirely  destitute  of  corresponding  qualities. 

§  69.  Order  in  which  ihc  Parables  rve7-e  Delivered. —  Their  Pofcction.—- 
Mude  fif  In(crj)rcti?/g  the  in. 
We  find  many  parables  placed  together  in  Matthew,  xiii. ;  and  the 
question  naturally  arises  whether  it  is  probable  that  Christ  uttered  so 
many  at  one  and  the  same  time.  We  can  readily  conceive  that  he 
should  use  various  parables  in  succession  in  order  to  present  the  same 


PARABLES.  109 

truth,  or  several  closely  related  truths,  in  different  forms ;  this  variety- 
would  tend  to  excite  attention,  to  present  the  one  truth  more  clearly  by 
such  various  illustration,  to  put  the  one  subject  before  the  beholder's 
eye  more  steadily,  in  many  points  of  view,  and  thus  to  imprint  it  indel- 
ibly upon  his  memory.  But  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  Christ  deliv- 
ered a  succession  of  parables  different  both  in  form  and  matter,  or,  if 
somewhat  alike  in  form,  different  in  scope  and  design ;  for  this  could 
only  have  confused  the  minds  of  his  hearers,  and  thus  frustrated  the  very 
purpose  of  this  mode  of  instruction. 

It  will  be  easy  to  gather  What  is  necessary  to  the  perfection  of  the 
parable,  from  what  we  have  said  of  its  nature.  In  tlie  first  place,  the 
fact  selected  from  the  lower  sphere  of  life  should  be  perfectly  adapted, 
in  its  own  nature,  to  give  a  vivid  representation  of  the  higher  truth ; 
and,  secondly,  the  individual  traits  of  the  lower  fact  itself  should  be 
clearly  exhibited  according  to  nature.  Hence,  in  order  to  understand 
the  parables  correctly,  we  must  endeavour  to  seize  upon  the  single 
truth  which  the  parabolic  dress  is  designed  to  illustrate,  and  refer  all 
the  rest  to  this.  The  separate  features,  which  serve  to  give  roundness 
and  distinctness  to  the  picture  of  the  lower  fact,  may  aid  us  in  obtain- 
ing a  more  many-sided  view  of  the  one  truth,  the  higher  sphere  con-e- 
sponding  to  the  lower  in  more  respects  than  one  (e.  g.,  the  parables  of 
the  shepherd  and  the  sower) ;  but  we  must  never  seek  the  perfection 
of  the  parables  of  Christ  in  giving  significancy,  apart  from  the  projier 
point  of  comparison,  to  the  parts  of  the  narrative  which  were  merely 
intended  to  complete  it ;  for  this,  by  diverting  the  mind  from  the  one 
truth  to  a  variety  of  particulars,  can  only  embarrass  instead  of  assisting 
it,  and  must  thus  frustrate  the  very  aim  of  the  parable  itself.  Such  a 
procedure  would  open  a  wide  field  for  arbitrary  interpretation,  and 
could  not  fail  to  lead  the  hearer  astray. 

The  separate  parables  will  be  treated  in  their  proper  connexions  in 
the  course  of  the  narrative. 

§  70.  Christ's  Teaching  not  confined  to  Parahles,  hut  conveyed  also 
in  longer  Discourses, 

It  followed,  not  only  fi-om  Christ's  chosen  mode  of  teaching,  but  also 
from  his  relations  to  the  new  spiritual  creation  whose  seeds  he  implant- 
ed in  the  hearts  of  his  disciples,  that  he  used  pithy  and  sententious  say- 
ings and  aphorisms  instead  of  lengthened  exhibitions  of  doctrine. 
They  were  intended  to  be  retained  in  ever  vivid  recollection,  and,  not- 
withstanding their  separation,  to  contain  the  germs  of  an  organically 
connected  system  of  moral  and  religious  truth.  The  interpreter  and 
the  historian  find  the  difficulty  of  placing  these  in  their  proper  relations 
and  occasions  increased  by  the  fact  that  the  accounts  of  the  first  three 


110  THE  MEANS  OF  CHRIST. 

Evangelists  airange  and  present  them  in  different  connexions  of  tliouglit. 
The  Church,  however,  has  lost  nothing  by  this  ;  it  only  establishes  the 
doctrine  that  the  truths  uttered  by  Christ  admit  of  manifold  apprehen- 
sion and  application.  Yet  there  is  no  ground  for  the  assumption  that 
Christ  taught  only  by  means  of  parables  and  aphorisms.  The  suppo- 
sition, in  itself,  is  sufficiently  improbable,  that  he  never  employed  longer 
and  more  connected  forms  of  discourse  for  the  instruction  of  the  circles 
of  disciples  who  had  received  impressions  from  him  and  gathered  them- 
selves about  his  person  ;  and,  besides,  an  example  of  this  kind  (recorded 
by  the  first  three  Evangelists)  is  to  be  found  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount. 
We  shall  hereafter  inquire  more  closely  into  the  system  of  Christian 
truth  contained  in  that  discourse. 

§  71.  John's  Gospel  contains  chiefly  connected  and  2>rofound  Dis- 
courses ;  and  Why  1 

We  must  here  consider  the  difference  between  the  form  of  Christ's 
expositions  as  given  by  \)aQ  first  three  Evangelists,  and  as  recorded  by 
John.  Some  recent  writers  have  found  an  irreconcilable  opposition 
between  them  both  of  form  and  substance;  and  have  concluded  there- 
from either  that  John,  in  reproducing  the  discourses  of  Christ  from 
memory,  involuntarily  blended  his  own  subjective  views  with  them,  and 
thus  presented  doctrines  which  a  real  disciple  could  not  at  the  time 
have  apprehended ;  or  that  some  one  else  at  a  later  period,  and  not 
John,  was  the  author  of  this  Gospel.  They  contrast  the  thoroughly 
practical  bearing  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  with  (what  they  call)  the 
mystical  character  of  the  discourses  recorded  by  John.  They  find  ev- 
ery thing  in  the  former  simple  and  intelligible,  while  the  latter  abounds  in 
paradoxes,  and  seems  to  study  obscurity.  Moreover,  the  latter  is  almost 
destitute  of  parables ;  a  form  of  eloquence  not  only  national,  but  also 
characteristic  of  Christ,  judging  from  his  discourses  as  given  in  the 
other  Gospels. 

But  let  any  one  only  yield  himself  to  the  impression  of  the  Sermon 
on  the  Mount,  and  then  ask  himself  whether  it  be  probable  that  a  mind 
of  the  loftiness,  depth,  and  power  which  that  discourse  evinces,  could 
have  employed  only  one  mode  of  teaching?  A  mind  which  swayed 
not  only  simple  and  practical  souls,  but  also  so  profoundly  speculative 
an  intellect  as  that  of  Paul,  could  not  but  have  scattered  the  elements 
of  such  a  tendency  from  the  very  first.  We  cannot  but  infer,  from  the 
irresistible  power  which  Christianity  exerted  upon  minds  so  diversely 
constituted  and  cultivated,  that  the  sources  of  that  power  lay  combined* 

*  We  should  believe  this  even  if  we  were  to  admit  IVWsse's  view,  viz.,  that  the  basis 
of  this  Gospel  was  a  collection  of  the  Aoyia  toC  Kvpkm  made  by  John,  and  afterward  wrought 
by  another  hand  into  the  form  of  a  historical  narrative.  But  Wcisse's  critical  processes 
seem  to  me  to  be  entirely  arbitrary.    John's  Gospel  is  altogether  (with  the  exception  of  a 


PARABLES.  Ill 

in  Him  whose  self-revelation  was  the  origin  of  Christianity  itself. 
Moreover,  the  other  Gospels  are  not  wanting  in  apparently  paradoxical 
expressions  akin  to  the  peculiar  tone  of  John's  Gospel,  e.  g.,  "  Let  the 
dead  hury  their  deadP*  Nor  will  an  attentive  observer  find  in  John 
alone  expressions  of  Christ  intended  to  increase,  instead  of  to  remove, 
tlie  offence  which  carnal  minds  took  at  his  doctrine.  We  repeat,  again, 
that  the  words  and  acts  of  the  true  Christ  could  not  have  been  free  from 
paradoxes ;  and  from  this,  indeed,  it  may  have  been  that  the  Pharisees 
were  led  to  report  that  he  had  lost  his  senses. 

Still,  it  is  true,  that  such  passages  are  given  by  John  much  more 
abundantly  than  the  other  Evangelists.  But  there  is  nothing  in  his  Gos- 
pel_purely  metaphysical  or  unpractical ;  none  of  the  spirit  of  the  Alex- 
andrian-Jewish theology;  but  every  where  a  direct  bearing  upon  the 
inner  life,  the  Divine  communion  which  Christ  came  to  establish.  Its 
form  would  have  been  altogether  different  had  it  been  composed,  as 
some  suppose,  in  the  second  century,  to  sujaport  the  Alexandrian  doc- 
trine of  the  Logos,  as  will  be  plain  to  any  one  who  takes  the  trouble 
to  compare  it  with  the  writings  of  that  age  that  have  come  down  to  us. 
The  discourses  given  in  the  first  three  Gospels,  mostly  composed  of 
separate  maxims,  precepts,  and  parables,  all  in  the  popular  forms  of 
speech,  were  better  fitted  to  be  handed  down  by  tradition  than  the  more 
profound  discussions  which  have  been  i-ecorded  by  the  beloved  disciple 
who  hung  with  fond  affection  upon  the  lips  of  Jesus,  treasured  his  rev- 
elations in  a  congenial  mind,  and  poured  them  forth  to  fill  up  the  gaps 
of  the  popular  narrative.  And  although  it  is  true  that  the  image  of 
Christ  given  to  us  in  this  Gospel  is  the  reflection  of  Christ's  impression 
upon  John's  peculiar  mind  and  feelings,  it  is  to  be  remembered  that 
these  very  peculiarities  were  obtained  by  his  intercourse  with,  and  vivid 
apprehension  of,  Christ  himself.  His  susceptible  nature  appropriated 
Christ's  life,  and  incorporated  it  with  his  own. 

§  72.    The  Parable  of  the  Shej^herd,  in  John,  compared  tcitJi  the 

Parables  in  the  other  Gospels. 
Parables,  as  we  have  said,  are  peculiarly  fitted  for  oral  tradition.    We 

few  passages  which  are  suspicious  both  on  external  and  internal  grounds)  a  work  of  one 
texture,  not  admitting  of  critical  decomposition.  In  Matthew,  not  only  internal  signs,  but 
also  historical  traditions,  when  considered  without  prejudice,  seem  to  distinguish  the  ori- 
ginal and  fundamental  composition  from  the  later  revision  of  the  work.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  author  in  whom  we  first  find  the  tradition  refen-ed  to  (Papias,  Euseb.,  iii.,  39)  makes 
mention  of  no  such  thing  in  regard  to  John's  Gospel.  He  must  have  known  the  fact,  had 
it  been  so,  living  as  he  did  in  Asia  Minor.  Some  adduce  Papias's  silence  about  John's 
Gospel  as  a  testimony  against  its  genuineness ;  but  his  object,  most  likely,  was  to  give  in- 
formation in  regard  to  those  parts  of  the  narrative  whose  origin  was  not  so  well  known  iri 
that  part  of  the  country  ;  whereas  John's  Gospel  was  fresh  in  every  one's  memoiy  there. 

*  Had  this  expression  occurred  in  John,  it  might  have  been  cited  as  a  specimen  of  "  Alex- 
andrian mysticism." 


112  THE  MEANS  OF  CHRIST. 

need  not  wonder,  therefore,  that  they  are  more  abundant  in  the  first 
three  Gospels,  which  were  composed  of  such  traditions,  than  in  John ; 
and,  moreover,  the  latter,  presupposing  them  to  be  known,  may  have 
had,  in  his  peculiar  turn  of  mind,  and  in  the  object  for  which  he  wrote 
his  Gospel,  sufficient  reasons  for  omitting  them.  Yet  the  discourses  of 
Christ,  as  given  by  him,  are  marked  by  the  very  peculiarity  that  gives 
rise  to  the  use  of  parables,  viz.,  the  illustration  of  the  Spiritual  and  the 
Divine,  by  images  taken  from  common  life. 

But  real  parables  ai"e  not  entirely  wanting  in  John's  Gospel.  The 
illustration  of  the  shepherd  and  the  sheep  (ch.  10)  has  all  the  essential 
features  of  the  parable,  and  John  himself  applies  that  name  to  it  (ver. 
6).  Here,  as  in  other  parables,  we  find  a  religious  truth  vividly  repre- 
sented by  a  similitude  taken  from  the  sphere  of  nature.  As,  for  in- 
stance, in  the  parable  of  the  sowc?-,  Christ  is  likened  to  the  husband- 
man, the  Divine  word  to  the  seed,  and  the  various  degrees  of  suscepti- 
bility for  the  word  in  men's  souls  to  the  variously  productive  soils  in 
which  the  seed  is  planted ;  so,  in  this  similitude,  the  relation  of  souls 
to  Christ  is  compared  with  that  of  sheep  to  the  shepherd  ;  and  the  self- 
seeking  teacher,  who  ofiers  himself,  on  his  own  authority  and  for  a  bad 
purpose,  as  a  guide  of  men,  is  likened  to  a  thief  who  does  not  enter  the 
sheep-fold  by  the  door,  but  climbs  over  the  wall.  Strauss  has  remark 
ed  that  this  parable  differs  from  those  of  the  Synoptical  Gospels  in  this, 
that  it  does  not  give  a  historical  narrative,  with  beginning,  middle,  and 
end,  of  a  fact  actually  otice  taking  place,  but  makes  use  simply  of  w"hat 
is  commonly  seen  to  happen.  But  even  this  feature  cannot  be  said  to 
be  essential  to  all  the  synoptical  parables,  but  only  to  those  in  which  a 
specific  occurrence  in  human  intercourse  is  assumed  to  illustrate  a  spir- 
itual truth  ;*  for  in  those,  on  the  otlier  hand,  which  are  not  taken  from 
social  and  civil  life,  but  from  the  sphere  of  man's  intercourse  with  na- 
ture, the  one  especial  fact  given  is  nothing  but  a  specimen  of  what  com- 
monly  takes  place ;  and  the  form  of  the  statement  could  be  entirely 
changed  in  this  respect,  without  at  all  affecting  its  substance.  Of  this 
the  })arable  of  the  sower  is  an  example,  and,  indeed,  those  of  the  leaven 
and  the  mustard  seed  also.  So,  too,  John's  parable  of  the  shepherd  and 
the  sheep  might  be  stated  in  the  form  of  a  fact  once  occurring,  without 
losing  a  particle  of  its  individuality. 

■"  Even  were  the  name  parahlfs  (as  a  distinct  form  of  .similitudes)  restrirted  tn  represen- 
tations of  this  class,  such  a  distinction  would  not  destroy  tiie  analogy  between  Christ's  dis- 
courses in  John  and  those  in  the  other  Gospels,  founded  on  their  use,  in  common,  of  the  sain9 
mode  of  vividly  exhibiting  spiritual  truths. 


ACCOMMODATION.  113 


C.  CHRIST'S  USE  OF  ACCOMMODATION'. 
§  73.  Necessity  of  Accovimodation. 

We  must  mention  Christ's  adaptation  of  his  instruction  to  the  capa- 
city of  his  hearers,  as  one  of  the  peculiar  features  of  his  mode  of  teach- 
ing. Without  such  accommodation,  indeed,  there  can  be  no  such  thing 
as  instruction.  The  teacher  must  begin  upon  a  ground  common  to  his 
pupils,  with  principles  presupposed  as  known  to  them,  in  order  to  ex- 
tend the  sphere  of  their  knowledge  to  further  truths.  He  must  lower 
himself  to  them,  in  order  to  raise  them  to  himself.  As  the  true  and  the 
false  are  commingled  in  their  conceptions,  he  must  seize  upon  the  true 
as  his  point  of  departure,  in  order  to  disengage  it  from  the  encumber- 
ing false.  So  to  the  child  the  man  becomes  a  child,  and  explains  the 
truth  in  a  form  adapted  to  its  age,  by  making  use  of  its  childish  con- 
ceptions as  a  veil  for  it. 

In  accordance  with  this  principle,  every  revelation  of  God,  having 
for  its  object  the  training  of  tnanliind  for  the  Divine  life  (and  we  must 
never  forget  that  this  was  the  sole  aim  of  Christianity,  as  well  as  of  the 
preparatory  institutions  which  preceded  it),  has  made  use  of  this  law  of 
accommodation,  in  order  to  present  the  Divine  to  the  consciousness  of 
men  in  forms  adapted  to  their  respective  stand-points.  And  as  Christ 
by  no  means  intended,  as  we  have  before  remarked,  to  impart  a  com- 
plete system  of  doctrine  as  a  mere  dead  tradition;  but  rather  to  stimu- 
late men's  minds  to  a  living  appropriation  and  developement  of  the 
truth  which  he  revealed,  by  means  of  the  powers  with  which  God  had 
endowed  them  ;  it  was  the  more  necessary  for  him  to  adapt  his  instruc- 
tion to  the  capacities  of  those  who  heard  him.  His  teaching  by  para- 
bles, in  which  the  familiar  affairs  of  every-day  life  were  made  the  veil 
and  vehicle  of  unknown  and  higher  truths,  was  an  instance  of  accom- 
modation. The  pedagogic  principle  of  joining  the  old  with  the  new, 
of  making  the  old  new  and  the  new  old,  and  of  deriving  the  new  from 
the  old,  is  fully  illustrated  in  the  saying  of  Christ  before  referred  to, 
viz.,  that  the  teacher,  instructed  in  the  kingdom  of  Heaven,  is  like  "  a 
householder,  who  hringcth  forth  out  of  his  treasure  things  new  and  oldT 
To  this  principle,  constantly  employed  by  Christ  in  his  teaching,  we 
must  ascribe  the  extraordinary  influence  of  Christianity  upon  human 
culture  from  the  very  beginning.  But,  just  as  the  "form  of  a  servant'' 
hindered  many  eyes  from  seeing  the  Son  of  God  in  the  Son  of  Man,  so 
the  Divine,  which  adapted  itself  to  human  infirmities  by  veiling  its 
heavenly  grandeur,  was  often  concealed  by  the  very  veil  which  it  had 
assumed. 

H 


114  THE  MEANS  OF  CHRIST. 

§  74.  Distinction  between  Positive  (Material)  and  Negative  (Formal) 
Accommodation  ;  the  latter  necessary,  the  former  inadmissible. 

"We  must  carefully  separate  false  from  true  accommodation  ;  there  is 
a  broad  distinction  between  a  negative  accommodation  of  the  form 
and  a  positive  one  of  the  substance.  The  teacher  who  adopts  the  latter 
Avill  confirm  his  hearers  in  an  error,  in  order  to  gain  their  confidence, 
and  to  infuse  into  their  minds,  even  by  means  of  error,  some  important 
truth.  But  the  laws  of  morality  do  not  admit  that  "  the  end  sanctifies 
the  means;"  nor  can  the  establishment  of  error  ever  be  a  just  means 
of  propagating  truth.  And  it  is  as  impolitic  as  it  is  immoral  ;  for  erroj-, 
as  well  as  truth,  contains  within  itself  a  fructifying  germ,  and  no  one 
can  predict  what  fruit  it  will  produce.  He  who  makes  use  of  it  re- 
nounces at  once  the  character  of  a  teacher  of  truth  ;  no  man  will  trust 
him,  and  he  can  therefore  exert  a  spiritual  influence  upon  none. 
There  is  no  criterion  for  distinguishing  the  truth  of  his  aims  from  the 
falsehood  of  his  means.  Such  an  accommodation  as  this  was  utterly 
repugnant  to  the  holy  nature  of  Him  who  called  himself  The  Truth  ; 
and  there  is  no  trace  of  it  to  be  found  in  his  teachings. 

It  is  quite  a  different  thing  with  the  negative  and  for7nal  accommo- 
dation. As  Christ's  sole  calling  as  a  teacher  was  to  implant  the 
fundamental  truths  of  the  kingdom  of  God  in  the  human  consciousness, 
he  could  not  stop  by  the  Avay  to  battle  with  errors  utterly  unconnected 
with  his  object,  and  remote  from  the  interests  of  religion  and  morality. 
Thus  he  made  use  of  common  terms  and  expressions  without  enterino^ 
into  an  examination  of  all  the  false  notions  that  might  be  attached  to 
them.  He  called  diseases,  for  instance,  by  the  names  in  common  use; 
but  we  should  not  be  justified  in  concluding  that  he  thereby  stamped 
with  his  Divine  authority  the  ordinary  notions  of  their  origin,  as  implied 
in  the  names.  Nor  does  his  citation  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament 
by  the  accustomed  titles  imply  any  sanction  on  his  part  of  the  prevalent 
opinions  in  regard  to  their  authors.  We  must  never  forget  that  his 
■words,  as  he  himself  has  told  us,  arc  Sj)irit  and  Lfo;  and  that  no  scribe 
of  the  old  Ilabbinical  school,  no  slave  to  the  letter,  can  rightly  com])re- 
hend  and  apply  them. 

Nor  did  he  make  use  of  positive  accommodation  in  seizing,  as  he 
did,  upon  those  religious  conceptions  of  the  times  which  concealed  the 
germ  of  truth  under  material  forms.  It  was  not  his  aim  to  preserve 
the  mere  shell,  the  outward  form,  but  to  disengage  the  inner  truth 
from  its  covering,  and  bring  it  out  into  free  and  pure  developemcnt. 
This  he  could  only  effect  by  causing  men  to  change  their  whole  carnal 
mode  of  thinking,  of  which  the  material  form  of  representation,  just 
referred  to,  was  only  one  of  the  results.  These  remarks  apply  espe- 
cially to  the  use  which  he  made  of  the  common  outward  imao-ps  of  the 


ACCOMMODATION.  115 

Messianic  world-dominion  ;  which  he  certainly  would  not  have  cm- 
ployed,  if  they  had  not  contained  a  substantive  truth  in  regard  to  the 
developemcnt  of  the  kingdom  of  God  from  the  Old  Testament  stand- 
point.* To  attack  these  material  ideas  directly,  and  present  the  pure, 
spiritual  truth  as  a  ready-made  system,  would  have  been  fruitless  ;  it 
was  only  from  the  deeper  ground  in  which  the  en'oneous  tendencies 
were  imbedded  that  they  could  be  successfully  overthrown.  And 
Christ,  taking  the  truth  that  lay  in  the  outward  form  as  his  point  of 
departure,  attacked  the  root  of  all  the  separate  errors  ;  the  selfish, 
carnal  mind,  the  longing  for  worldly  rank  and  rewards  ;  and  implanted, 
on  the  other  hand,  the  purely  spiritual  ideas  of  the  Divine  kingdom,  as 
seeds  from  which,  in  due  time,  a  free  reaction  against  the  material 
tendency  would  spontaTieously  arise. 

Of  the  same  character  was  the  use  which  Christ  made  of  figurative 
analogies  like  that  In  Matt.,  xii.,  43,t  et  seq.  In  such  cases  the  figura- 
tive representation  was  employed,  like  the  parable,  to  exhibit  an  idea 
vividly  to  the  minds  of  his  hearers,  while,  at  the  same  time,  Its  con- 
nexion was  such  that  he  could  not  possibly  be  misunderstood. 

§  75.  Christ's  Application  of  Fassagcs  from  the  Old  Testament. 
What  we  have  said  in  regard  to  Christ's  habit  of  taking  up  a  con- 
cealed truth  is  especially  applicable  to  his  use  of  quotations  from  the 
Old  Testament,  which  enveloped,  as  it  were,  and  contained  the  ferm 
of  truths  which  he  was  fully  to  unfold  and  develope.  In  this  j)oInt  of 
view,  he  derived,  from  the  Old  Testament,  truths  which,  though  n(jt 
contained  In  the  letter  of  its  words,  were  involved  in  its  spirit  and  fun- 
damental Import.  The  higher  spirit,  which  appeared  in  Its  unlimited 
fulness  In  Christ,  was  predominant  In  the  Old  Testament  ;  all  the 
preparatory  revelations  of  that  spirit  had  Christ  for  their  aim  ;  the 
Theocratic  idea,  which  formed  the  central-point  both  of  the  Scriptures 
and  the  Jewish  nation,  had  found  no  fulfilment,  but  looked  to  the  fu- 
ture for  Its  realization.  Christ  was  perfectly  justified,  therefore.  In  so 
Interpreting  the  Old  Testament  as  to  bring  out  clearly  its  hidden  in- 
timations and  germs  of  truth,  and  to  unfold  from  the  coverln"-  of  the 
letter  the  profounder  sense  of  the  Spirit.  We  shall  have  occasion  to 
Illustrate  this  more  fully  in  our  exposition  of  Christ's  didactic  and  po- 
lemic use  of  the  Old  Testament.  Paul's  interpretation  of  the  Old 
Testament  was  of  precisely  the  same  character  ;  with  this  difference 
only,  that  Christ  was  better  able  to  distinguish  the  different  stages  of 
the  Theocratic  developement,  pointing,  as  they  all  did,  to  his  manifest- 
ation, 

»  See  p.  86  and  87. 

t  We  shall  have  occasion  to  speak  of  this  passage  more  fully  in  another  connexion. 


116  THE  MEANS  OF  CHKIST. 


CHAPTER  III. 

CHRIST'S  CHOICE  AA'D  TRAINING  OF  THE  APOSTLES. 

§  76.   Christ's  Relation   to  the    Twelve. — Significeufice  of  the   Numhcr 
Twelve. —  The  Name  Ajwstle. 

WE  have  before  remarked,  that  among  the  most  important  means 
employed  by  Christ  in  founding  the  kingdom  of  God  was  the 
training  of  certain  organs  ;  not  only  to  replace  his  personal  labours  as 
a  teacher  (which  were  limited  to  so  very  brief  a  period),  but  also  to 
propagate  a  true  image  of  his  person,  his  manifestation,  his  Spirit,  and 
his  truth.  Here  arises  the  question,  whether  Christ  intentionally 
selected  twelve  men  for  this  purpose,  and  took  the  individuals  thus 
chosen  into  closer  communion  with  himself,  or  whether  this  intimate 
relationship  arose  out  of  a  gradual  separation  of  the  more  susceptible 
disciples  from  the  mass,  who  formed  by  degrees  a  narrower  and  more 
permanent  circle  about  his  person  ;  whether,  in  a  word,  the  choice  of 
the  twelve  was  made  once  for  all,  by  a  definite  purpose,  or  arose  simply 
from  the  nature  of  the  case.*  Some  adopt  the  latter  notion,  with  a 
view  to  answer  objections  against  the  wisdom  of  Christ's  selection ; 
such,  for  instance,  as  that  he  chose  several  insignificant  inen,  who  accom- 
plished nothing  of  importance,  and  omitted  others  who  were  afterward 
signally  eminent  and  useful ;  that  he  must  either  have  been  deceived 
in  admitting  Judas  into  the  number,!  or  else  (what  is  entirely  out  of 
keeping  with  his  character)  must  have  made  him  an  Apostle  with  a  full 
consciousness  of  his  inevitable  destiny,  in  order  to  lead  him  on  to  his 
destruction.  It  is  urged,  moreover,  against  the  probability  of  Christ 
himself  having  conferred  the  name  of  Ajiostlcs  upon  these  men  especial- 
ly, that  others,  {e.g.,  Paul),  who  laboured  in  proclaiming  the  Crosj)el  at 
a  later  period,  received  that  designation. 

This  question  would  be  at  once  decided,  if  we  could  consider  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount  as  an  ordination  discourse  for  the  Apostles  ;  but 
this  view,  as  we  shall  hereafter  show,  is  untenable.  But  there  are 
passages  J  which  speak  expressly  of  the  choosing  of  the  twelve  ;  and, 
even  without  attaching  undue  weight  to  these,  there  are  other  and  suf- 
ficient grounds  for  believing  that  such  a  choice  was  actually  made. 
Christ  himself  tells  the  Apostles  (John,  xv.,  16)  that  they  had  not 
chosen  him,  but  that  he  had  chosen  them,  as  his  own  peculiar  organs; 
which  would  not  have  been  true  if  they  hud  first  separated,  of  their  own 

*  See  tlie  arqumoiits  for  this  view  in  Srhlckrmachcr  on  Lnlcc,  p.  88. 
t  CeLsus  thought  to  (lispai-asre  Clu'ist  by  tclliiig  tliathe  wiis  betraye<l  by  one  of  liis  ilisci- 
ples.     (Grig.,  c.  Cels.,  ii.,  $  I'J.)  X  Luke,  vi.,  13  ;  Mark,  iii.,  13,  14. 


TPIE  APOSTLES.  117 

accord,  from  the  rest  of  the  multitude,  and  chosen  him  for  their  Master 
and  guide,  in  a  narrower  sense  than  others. 

Nor  is  the  number  twelve  destitute  of  significance.  Without  seeking 
any  sacred,  mystical  meaning  in  the  number,  we  can  well  see  in  it  a 
reference  to  the  number  of  the  tribes  of  Israel.  The  particular,  Jew- 
ish Theocracy  was  a  type  of  the  universal  and  eternal  kingdom  of 
God  ;  and  Christ  first  designated  himself  as  head  of  that  kingdom  in 
the  Jewish  national  form.  The  twelve  were  to  lead  the  kingdom  as 
his  organs.*  Their  superiority  to  all  others,  who  should  also  act  as 
organs  of  the  Holy  Spirit  testifying  within  them  of  the  Redeemer  (the 
common  calling  of  all  believers),  consisted  in  this,  that  they  received  a 
direct  and  personal  impression  of  the  words  and  works  of  Clmst,  and 
could  thus  testify  of  what  they  had  seen  and  heard.  This  personal  tes- 
timony of  eye-witnesses  is  expressly  distinguished  by  Christ  (John, 
XV.,  27)  from  the  objective  testimony  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  which,  indeed, 
animated  them,  but  could  also  bear  witness  through  other  organs. 
Hence,  when  one  of  the  twelve  was  lost,  the  Apostles  deemed  it  ne- 
cessary to  replace  him,  and  thus  fill  up  the  number  oiiginally  instituted 
by  Christ.f 

The  more  general  application  of  the  name  Ajwstle  in  the  Apostolic 
age  is  no  proof  that  Christ  did  not  originally  use  it  in  the  narrower 
sense.  The  Apostolic  mind  was  under  no  such  painful  subserviency  to 
the  letter  as  to  avoid  the  use  of  a  name  in  a  sense  suggested  by  the  name 
itself,  simply  because  Christ  had  used  it  in  a  more  contracted  significa- 
tion. The  term  aTToaroXoL  (rn'^!!')  denoted  persons  sent  out  by  Christ 
to  proclaim  the  kingdom  of  God  ;  and  it  was  quite  natural,  as  all  who 
preached  the  Gospel  were  considered  as  sent  out  by  him,  that  all  who 
laboured  in  proclaiming  it  in  a  wide  sphere  should  receive  the  same 
designation.!  Although  Paul  used  the  term  in  its  wider  meaning,  he 
yet  considered  the  narrower  sense  to  be  the  original  one,§  and  justified 
his  application  of  the  latter  to  himself  only  on  the  ground  of  the  direct 
and  immediate  call  which  he  had  received  from  Christ. || 

§  77.  Choice  of  the  Apostles. —  Of  Judas  Iscariot. 
There  are  a  few  examples  on  record  of  Christ's  drawing  and  attach- 
ing to  himself  disciples  who  exhibited  to  his  piercing  eye  the  qualities 
necessary  for  his  sei"vice.  Probably  this  procedure  was  the  same  in  the 
cases  not  recorded.  The  wisdom  of  Christ,  moreover,  leads  us  to  con- 
clude that  the  cultivation  of  these  agents,  on  whose  fitness  so  much  de- 

*  Matt.,  xix.,  28  ;  Lnke,  xxii.,  30.  Ye  also  shall  sit  vpon  ticdve  thrones,  judging:  the 
twelve  tribes  of  Israel.  t  Acts,  i.,  21. 

t  The  questions  whether  Christ  chose  twelve  men  as  his  special  organs,  and  whether  lie 
himself  gave  them  the  name  Apostles,  are  entirely  distinct.  There  is  no  good  reason  to 
doubt  the  latter.  $  1  Cor.,  xv.,  7.  ||  1  Cor.,  ix.,  1 ;  xv.,  9. 


118  THE  MEANS  OF  CHRIST. 

pended,  was  an  object  of  his  special  care  and  attention.  Although  \vp 
have  not  sufficient  information  to  decide,  in  the  case  of  each  Apostlfe, 
Avhy  he  especially  was  admitted  into  the  number  of  the  twelve,  yet  such 
examples  as  Peter  and  John,  men  of  most  sinking  character,  who  show 
ns  how  the  most  marked  features  of  human  nature  receive  and  tinge 
Christianity,  illustrate  the  profound  wisdom  of  Christ,  and  the  penetr«-l 
ting  glance  with  which  he  could  detect  the  concealed  plant  in  the  inj 
significant  germ.  Yet  we  are  not  bound,  in  order  to  vindicate  Christ's 
wisdom,  to  conclude  that  all  the  Apostles  were  alike  men  of  mark,  alike 
capable  of  great  achievements.  It  was  enough  for  the  fulfilment  of 
their  calling  that  they  loved  him  tiaily,  that  they  followed  him  with 
child-like  confidence,  and  gave  themselves  wholly  up  to  the  guidance 
of  his  Spirit;  for  thus  they  would  be  enabled  to  testify  of  him,  and  to 
exhibit  his  image  in  truth  and  purity.  It  was  enough  that  among  the 
number  there  were  a  few  men  of  pre-eminently  po\verful  character,  on 
M'hom  the  rest  might  lean  for  support.  It  sufficed,  nay,  it  was  even  ad- 
vantageous, for  the  developement  of  the  Church,  that  the  Apostles,  as 
a  whole,  left  their  accounts  of  the  history  of  Christ  without  the  peculiar 
stamp  of  individual  character,  since  there  was  only  one  John  among 
them  cajiable  of  giving  a  vivid  image  of  the  life  of  the  Saviour  in  har- 
monious unity.  And  it  is,  therefore,  not  at  all  wonderful  that  men  aj)- 
peared  in  the  later  period  of  the  Apostolic  Church  who  accomplished 
greater  things  than  even  some  of  the  Apostles. 

As  for  Judas  Iscariot,  it  by  no  means  follows  from  the  passages 
which  say  that  Christ  knetv  him  from,  the  beginning,  that  he  knew  him 
as  an  enemy  and  a  traitor ;  nor  does  the  awful  contrast  between  his 
Apostolic  calling  and  his  final  fate  show  that  Christ  was  wholly  deceived 
in  him.  Judas  may  have  at  first  embraced  the  proclamation  of  tliu 
kingdom  of  God  with  ardent  feelings,  although  with  expectations  of  a 
selfish  and  worldly  stamp;  which,  indeed,  was  the  case  with  others  of 
the  Apostles.  He  may  have  loved  Christ  sincerely  so  long  as  he  hoped 
to  find  in  him  the  fulfilment  of  his  carnal  desires.  Christ  may  have 
seen  in  him  capacities  which,  animated  by  pui'e  intentions,  might  have 
made  him  a  particularly  useful  instrument  in  spreading  the  kingdom 
of  CJoD.  At  the  same  time,  he  doubtless  perceived  in  him,  as  in  tlie 
rest  of  the  Apostles,  the  impure  influence  of  the  worldly  and  selfish  ele- 
ment, yet  he  may  have  hoped  (to  do  for  him  what  he  certainly  did  for 
the  others,  viz.)  to  remove  it  by  the  enlightening  and  purifying  effects 
of  his  personal  intercourse  ;  a  result,  however,  which,  we  freely  admit, 
depended  upon  the  free  self-determination  of  Judas,  and  could,  there- 
fore, be  unerringly  known  to  none  but  the  Omniscient.  And  even 
Avhen  Judas,  deceived  in  his  canial  and  selfish  hopes,  felt  his  affection 
for  Christ  passing  into  hatred,  the  love  of  the  Saviour,  hoping  all  things, 


THE  APOSTLES.  119 

though  he  saw  the  rising  root  of  evil,  may  have  induced  him  to  strive 
the  more  earnestly  to  attract  the  wanderer  to  himself,  in  order  to  save 
him  from  impending  ruin.* 

§  78.  The  Apostles  Uneducated  Men. 
It  may  appear  strange  that  Christ  should  have  selected,  as  his  chosen 
organs,  men  so  untaught  and  unsusceptible  in  Divine  things,  and  should 
have  laboured,  in  opposition  to  their  worldly  tendencies,  to  fit  them  for 
their  office ;  especially  when  men  of  learned  cultivation  in  Jewish  the- 
ology were  at  hand,  more  than  one  of  whom  had  attached  themselves 
sincerely  to  him.  But  we  are  justified  in  presupposing  that  he  acted 
thus  according  to  a  special  decision  of  his  own  wisdom,  as  he  himself 
testifies  (Matt.,  xi.,  25) :  "  I  thank  thee,  O  Father,  because  thou  hast  hid 
these  things  from  the  wise  and  jtrudent,  and  hast  revealed  them  unto 
babes.''''  Precisely  because  these  men,  destitute  of  all  higher  learning, 
attached  themselves  to  him  like  children,  and  obeyed  even  his  slightest 
hints,  were  they  best  fitted  to  receive  his  Spirit  with  child-like  devotion 
and  confidence,  and  to  propagate  the  revelations  which  he  made  to 
them.  Every  thing  in  them  was  to  be  the  growth  of  the  new  creation 
through  Christ's  Spirit ;  and  men  who  had  received  a  complete  culture 
elsewhere  would  have  been  ill  adapted  for  this.  They  were  trammel- 
led, it  is  true,  by  their  carnal  conceptions  of  Divine  things ;  but  this 
was  counterbalanced  by  their  anxiety  to  learn,  and  their  child-like  sub- 
mission to  Christ  as  Master  and  guide  ;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  in- 
surmountable obstacles  would  have  been  presented  in  the  want  of  such 
submission — in  the  stubborn  adherence  to  preconceived  views  of  men 
who  liad  been  trained  and  cultivated  before.  Moreover,  this  rever- 
ential submission  to  Christ  on  the  part  of  the  disciples,  in  their  daily 
intercourse  with  him,  tended  surely  and  constantly  to  refine  and  spirit- 
ualize their  mode  of  thinking.  His  image,  received  into  their  inner 
life,  exerted  a  steady  and  overruling  influence.  In  the  mode  in  which 
the  new  revelations  were  embraced  and  developed,  we  recognize 
the  general  laio,  according  to  which  truths  beyond  the  scope  of  human 
reason  are  imparted  to  it  from  higher  sources,  to  be  afterward  appro- 
priated and  elaborated  as  its  own.  They  were  first  received  and  un- 
folded by  men  who  had  no  previous  education  to  enable  them  to  work 
out  independently  that  which  was  given  them  ;  and  only  at  a  later  pe- 
riod was  a  Paul  added  to  the  Apostles — a  man  capable,  from  his  sys- 
tematic mental  cultivation,  of  elaborating  and  unfolding,  by  his  own 
power  of  thought,  yet  under  the  guidance  of  the  same  Spirit  of  Christ, 
the  material  of  Divine  revelation  that  was  bestowed  upon  him.  The 
fact,  too,  that  a  people  like  the  Jews,  and  not  the  Greeks,  were  first  the 
chosen  organ  for  the  propagation  of  revealed  religion,  is  an  illustration 
*  See,  hereafter,  more  on  the  character  aud  fate  of  Judas. 


120  THE  MEA'NS  OF  CHRIST. 

of  the  same  law.  Here  we  find  tlie  source  of  the  ever-renewed  strug- 
gle betwen  Revelation,  which  demands  a  humble  reception  of  its  gifts, 
and  Reason,  which  \vill  recognize  nothing  that  is  not  wrought  out,  or, 
at  least,  remodelled,  in  its  own  laboratory. 

Still  Christ  could  not  have  deemed  the  period  of  two  or  three  years 
sufficient  to  prepare  these  untrained  disciples,  according  to  his  mind, 
for  teachers  of  men.  Nor  could  he  have  foretold,  with  such  confidence, 
the  success  of  such  men  in  propagating  his  truth  for  the  salvation  and 
training  of  men,  for  the  victorious  founding  of  the  kingdom  of  God  in 
all  ages,  had  hfe  not  been  conscious  of  powers  higher  than  had  been 
granted  to  any  other  teacher  among  men,  which  justified  him  in  making 
such  predictions. 

§  79.    Two  Stages  in  the  Dependence  of  the  Apostles  upon  Christ. 

From  the  very  beginning  the  Apostles  stood  to  Christ  in  a  relation 
of  complete  dependence  and  submission,  but  we  must  distinguish  in 
this  two  different  forms  and  periods.  In  the  first,  their  dependence  was 
more  outward  and  unconscious  ;  in  the  last,  it  was  more  inward,  and 
thoroughly  understood  by  themselves.  From  the  beginning,  they  gave 
themselves  up,  with  reverent  confidence,  to  the  will  of  Christ  as  their 
supreme  law,  inspired  by  the  conviction  that  what  he  commanded  was 
right ;  yet  without  a  clear  apprehension  either  of  his  will  or  word,  and 
without  the  ability  to  harmonize  their  will  with  his  by  free  conscious- 
ness and  self-determination.  But,  during  this  stage  of  outwaixl  depend- 
ence, they  were  to  be  trained  to  apprehend  his  will  (or,  what  is  the 
same  thing,  the  will  of  God  revealed  and  fulfilled  by  him) ;  to  incorpo- 
rate it  with  their  own  spiritual  tendencies  ;  in  a  word,  to  make  it  their 
own.  Christ  himself  pointed  out  this  two-fold  relation,  when  he  said 
to  them,  in  view  of  his  approaching  death,  in  reference  to  their  dawn- 
ing consciousness  of  the  necessity  of  his  suffering  in  order  to  establish 
the  Divine  kingdom  :  "  Henceforth  I  call  you  not  servants  ;  for  the  ser- 
vant Icnoweth  not  icliat  his  Lord  doeth  :  hut  I  have  called  you  friends  ; 
for  all  tilings  that  I  have  heard  of  my  Father  I  have  made  known  unto 
ijou.  Ye  have  not  chosen  vie,  hut  I  have  chosen  you,  and  ordained  you^ 
tliat  ye  should  go  and  hring  forth  fruit,  and  that  your  fruit  should  re- 
main ;  that  %vhatsucver  ye  shall  ash  of  the  Father  in  my  iiamc^  he  may 
give  it  your*  The  servant  follows  the  will  of  his  master  not  as  his 
own,  but  another's,  without  understanding  its  aim;  hwX,  friendship  is  a 
harmony  of  souls  and  sympathy  of  intentions.  The  ultimate  aim  of 
all  Christ's  training  of  the  Apostles  was  to  raise  them  from  the  first 
stand-point  to  the  second. 

*  .lolin,  XV.,  15,  IG.  So,  v.  14,  "  Yi',  are  viy  friemh,  if  yc  Jo  fchafsoevrr  I  command  you." 
Their  eflbits  to  perform  his  will  jicrfectly  proved  that  they  had  made  it  their  own. 


THE  APOSTLES.  121 

§  SO.    Christ'' s  peculiar  Method  of  training  the  Apostles. 

The  words  of  Christ  recorded  in  Luke,  v.,  33  ;  Matt.,  ix.,  14,*  throw 
a  distinct  light  upon  his  peculiar  method  of  training  the  Apostles. 
When  reproached  because  he  imposed  no  strict  spiritual  discipline,  no 
fasting  or  outward  exercises  upon  his  disciples,  but  suffered  them  to 
mingle  in  society  freely,  like  other  men,  he  justified  his  course  by  stat- 
ing (in  effect)  that  "  fasting,  then  imposed  upon  them,  would  have  been 
an  unnatural  and  foreign  disturbance  of  the  festal  joy  of  their  inter- 
course with  him,  the  object  of  all  their  longings.  But  when  the  sorrow 
of  separation  should  follow  the  hours  of  joy,  fasting  would  be  in  har- 
mony both  with  their  inward  feelings  and  their  outward  life.  As  no 
good  could  come  of  patching  old  garments  with  new  cloth,  or  putting 
new  wine  into  old  skins,  so  it  was  not  his  purpose  to  impose  the  exer- 
cises of  spiritual  life,  fasting,  and  the  like,  by  an  outward  law,  upon  his 
yet  untrained  disciples,  but  rather,  by  a  gradual  change  of  their  whole 
inward  nature,  to  make  them  vessels  fit  for  the  indwelling  of  the  higher 
life.  When  they  had  become  such,  all  the  essential  manifestations  of 
that  indwelling  life  would  spontaneously  reveal  themselves ;  no  out- 
ward command  would  then  be  needed." 

Here  we  see  the  principle  on  which  Christ  acted  in  the  intellectual, 
as  well  as  in  the  moral  and  religious  training  of  the  Apostles.  As  he 
would  not  lay  external  restraints,  by  the  letter  of  outward  laws,  upon 
natures  as  yet  undisciplined,  so  it  was  not  his  purpose  to  impart  the 
dead  letter  of  a  ready-made  and  fragmentary  knowledge  to  minds 
whose  worldly  modes  of  thought  disabled  them  from  apprehending  it. 
He  aimed  rather  to  implant  the  germ,  to  give  the  initial  impulse  of  a 
total  intellectual  renovation,  by  which  men  might  be  enabled  to  grasp, 
with  a  new  spirit,  the  new  truths  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  In  every 
relation  he  determined  not  to  "  patch  the  old  garment,  or  put  new  wine 
into  old  bottles."  And  this  principle,  thus  fully  illustrated  by  Christ'sjl 
training  of  his  Apostles,  is,  in  fact,  the  universal  law  of  growth  in  the 
genuine  Christian  life. 

*  More  on  tbese  passages  hereafter,  in  their  proper  connexion  in  the  nan-ative. 


122  THE  MEANS  OF  CHRIST. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  CHURCH  AND  BAPTISM. 
§  81,   Founding  of  the  ChurcJt. — lis  Objects. 

C1L0SELY  connected  with  the  questions  just  discussed  is  that  of 
J  the  founding  of  the  Church  ;  for  the  Apostles  were  the  organs 
through  whom  the  religious  community  which  originated  in  Christ  was 
to  be  handed  down  to  after  ages,  the  connecting  links  that  were  to  unite 
it  with  its  Founder.  A  clear  conception  of  tlie  idea  of  the  Church,  in 
comparison  with  what  we  have  said  of  the  plan  of  Christ,  will  make  it 
obvious  that  he  intended  to  establish  the  Church,  and  /^m^eT/'laid  its 
foundation. 

By  the  Church  we  understand  a  union  of  men  arising  from  the  fel- 
lowship (communion)  of  roHgious  life;  a  union  essentially  independent 
of,  and  different  from,  all  other  forms  of  human  association.  It  was  a 
fundamental  element  of  the  formation  of  this  union,  that  religion  was 
no  longer  to  be  inseparably  bound  up,  either  as  principal  or  subordi- 
nate, with  the  political  and  national  relations  of  men,  but  that  it  should 
develope  itself,  by  its  own  inherent  energy,  as  a  principle  of  culture 
and  union ;  superior,  in  its  very  essence,  to  all  human  powers.  This 
involved  both  the  power  and  the  duty  to  create  an  independent  com- 
munity, and  that  community  is  the  Church. 

And  Christianity  is  proved  to  be  the  aim  and  object  of  all  human 
progress,  not  only  by  the  craving  for  redemption,  which  no  man  can 
deny,  in  human  nature,  but  also  by  the  very  idea  of  such  a  community 
as  the  Church,  which  overthrows  all  natural  barriers,  and  binds  man- 
kind together  by  a  union  founded  on  the  common  alliance  of  their  na- 
ture to  God.  The  spirit  of  humanity,  feeling  itself  confined  by  the 
limits  which  the  opposing  interests  of  nations  impose  upon  it,  demands 
a  communion  that  shall  overleap  these  barriers,  and  lay  its  foundations 
only  in  the  consciousness,  common  to  all  men,  of  their  relation  to  the 
Highest — a  relation  transcending  the  world  and  nature.  Apart  from 
Christianity,  indeed,  wc  could  not  conceive  the  idea  of  such  a  commun- 
ion ;  but  now  that  Christianity  has  freed  Reason  from  the  old-worlu 
bonds  that  hindered  its  developement,  and  unfolded  for  it  a  higher 
Hclf-consciousness,  there  can  be  no  science  of  human  nature  that  does 
not  reckon  this  communion  as  the  aim  of  human  progress,  that  does 
not  assign  to  the  Church  its  proper  place  in  the  universal  moral  organ- 
ism of  humanity.  Schleiermacher  has  done  this  in  his  "  Philosophi- 
cal Ethics,"  and  has  thus  found,  in  the  Church,  the  point  of  departure 
for  Christian  morals.     And  so  every  system  of  ethics  must  do  which 


THE  CHUKCH.  123 

is  not  willing  to  fall  in  the  rear  of  liiunan  progress,  aiitl  to  he  guilty  of 
cruelly  mutilating  the  nature  of  man.  Nay,  the  minds  of  the  sages 
who  sought  to  break  through  the  limits  of  the  ancient  world  yearned 
for  this  idea  long  before  its  realization  in  Christianity.  Zeno,*  the 
founder  of  the  Stpa,  proclaimed  it  as  the  highest  of  human  aims,  that 
"  men  should  not  be  separated  by  cities,  states,  and  laws,  but  that  all 
should  be  considered  fellow-citizens,  and  partakers  of  one  life,  and  that 
the  whole  world,  like  a  united  flock,  should  be  governed  by  one  com- 
mon law."t  Plutarch,  who  quotes  these  words,  was  probably  right  in 
saying  that  "  Zeno  had  some  phantom  of  a  dream  before  him  when  he 
wrote  ;"|  for  how  could  an  idea,  so  far  transcending  the  spiiit  of  an- 
tiquity, be  realized  in  its  sphere  1  Such  a  communion  could  only  be 
brought  about,  at  that  time,  by  the  destruction  of  the  separate  organi 
zation  of  nations,  to  the  detriment  of  their  natural  and  individual  prog- 
ress ;  and  the  very  event  in  which  Plutarch  thought  he  saw  its  fulfil- 
ment, viz.,  the  commingling  of  the  nations  by  Alexander's§  conquests, 
carried  the  germ  of  self-destruction  within  it.  A  total  revolution  of 
the  ancient  world  necessarily  had  to  precede  the  realizing  of  this  idea. 
Mankind  had  to  be  freed  from  the  power  of  sin,  and  the  disjunctive 
and  repulsive  agency  of  sin,  before  there  could  be  any  place  for  this 
Divine  communion  of  life,  which  overleaps,  without  destroying,  the 
natural  divisions  of  nations.  And  this  is  the  realization  of  the  idea  of 
the  Church. 

Now  as  this  revolution  could  only  be  brought  about  by  Him  who 
was  at  once  Son  of  God  and  Son  of  Man,  so  He,  when  he  recogfnized 
himself  as  the  Saviour  and  King  bestowed  upon  mankind,  was  fully 
conscious,  also,  of  his  power  to  realize  this  idea.  It  is  clear,  from  what 
we  have  said  of  the  Plan  of  Christ,  that  the  results  which  were  to  flow 
in  after  ages  from  the  indwelling  power  of  the  Word  proclaimed  and 
sent  forth  by  him  to  regenerate  and  unite  mankind,  lay  fully  revealed 
before  his  all-surveying  glance.  He  knew  that  it  contained  the  ele- 
ments of  a  spiritual  community  that  would  burst  asunder  the  confining 
forms  of  the  Jewish  Theocracy,  and  take  all  mankind  into  its  wide  em 
bi'ace. 

§  82.  Name  of  the  Church. — Its  Form  traced  back  to  Christ  himself. 
But  even  if  it  be  admitted  that  Christ  intended  to  found  a  Church, 
the  further  (but  less  important)  question  arises,  whether  the  name, 

*  In  his  work,  wc/)!  nohrclas. 

t  'Iva  111]  Kara  n-rfXciS,  /iJ;(5f  Kara  Stjiiovi  ohZiitv,  IStoti  eKaaroi  iuopia^icrot  SiKaioti,  aX)iit  Trdvrai 
di'(9p(i)X0t)f  fiydfieOa  ^rjftorai  Kal  TroXira?,  CiS  ie  fiioi  j5  Kai  KoaixoS  uxjvcp  liyc^rii  avvioi-WV  vo^tu)  Koivifi 
avvTpi(ponivrii.     Plut.  ill  Alex.,  i.,  c.  vi. 

X  TovTO  Zi'iviov  ficv  eypalpcv  oxjvcp  dvap  rj  eiSdiXov  tvvoixtas  (pi}>oa6<f)ov  Kai  ■no\iTiltis  dvarviTUiaiifievoi- 

$  To  whom  he  applies  what  can  only  be  said  of  Christ:  <co(vdj  Hixetv  SeSdtv  dp/ioaTfn  xai 
dtaWaKTrjS  tCHv  ^Auic  vofii'^uv. 


124  THE  MEANS  OF  CHRIST. 

eiciiXTjaLa,  which  has  been  stamped  upon  it,  had  its  origin  with  him- 
self. There  is  no  ground  for  doubting  even  this  (as  some  have  done), 
and  thereby  casting  suspicion  upon  passages  like  Matt.,  xvi.,  18,  in 
which  he  is  reported  to  have  used  the  term.  The  name  corresponds 
to  the  Hebrew  ^np  ,  in  connexion  with  b^'^'ii[] ,  niri' ,  D'Tl^xn  ,  whicli 
expressed  the  old  Theocratic  national  community ;  and  so  was  trans- 
ferred to  the  new  congregation  of  God,  which  was  to  emerge  from  the 
ancient  covering.  This  communion  in  itself,  indeed,  is  nothing  but  the 
form  in  which  Christ  has  established  the  kingdom  of  God  upon  earth, 
and  in  which  he  intends  it  shall  develope  itself  until  its  full  consum- 
mation. 

But  it  must  not,  therefore,  be  concluded  that  this  community  was  ever 
to  realize  itself  in  the  form  of  a  State*  The  name,  borrowed  from  an 
earthly  Icingdom,  is,  on  one  side,  entirely  symbolical,  and  was  im 
mediately  taken  from  the  form  in  which  the  idea  of  the  Divine  com- 
munity was  represented  by  the  Jewish  nation.  But  the  essential 
difference  between  the  Jewish  and  the  Christian  stand-point  consists 
in  this,  that  in  the  latter  the  political  element  is  wholly  discarded. 
Excluding  all  other  relations  that  belong  to  the  essence  of  a  state,  the 
only  real  feature  expressed  by  the  symbolical  name  is  the  monarchical 
principle  ;  and  that,  too,  in  a  sense  that  cannot  be  applied  to  any  tem- 
poral state,  without  subverting  its  organism,  and  making  it  a  horde  of 
slaves  under  the  arbitrary  will  of  a  despot.  The  fundamental  princi- 
ple of  the  Christian  community  is,  that  there  shall  be  no  other  sub- 
ordination than  that  of  its  members  to  God  and  Christ,  and  that  this 
shall  be  absolute  ;  while,  in  regard  to  each  other,  they  are  to  be  upon 
the  footing  of  complete  equality.  Christ  himself  drew  a  striking  con- 
trast between  his  own  community  and  all  political  organizations  in  this 
respect.t 

But  even  though  it  be  admitted  that  Christ  intended  to  found  a 
visible  Church,  and  gave  the  first  impulse  to  a  movement  that  was 
afterward  to  propagate  itself,  it  does  not  necessarily  follow  that  he 
himself  directly  established  such  a  separate  community,  and  made  the 
aiTangements  and  preparations  that  naturally  belonged  to  it. 

It  may  be  said  that  the  outward  fabric  of  the  visible  Church  could 
not  be  erected  until  that  which  constituted  its  true  essence,  viz.,  the 
life  of  the  invisible  Church,  which  as  yet  lay  only  in  the  germ,  should 
be  more  fully  unfolded — until  the  higher  life  had  obtained  in  the  dis- 
ciples a  more  substantial  and  self-dependent  form,  a  state  of  things 
presupposed  in  a  community  whose  manifold  members  were  recipro- 

*  See  tliis  inference  drawn  by  RotJic,  m  his  work  "Ubcr  die  Anfiiuge  der  Cl'.ristliclien 
Kircbe  und  ihrcr  Verfassung,"  p.  89.  t  Luke,  xxii.,  25,  26. 


THE  CHURCH.  125 

cally  to  affect  each  other.  So,  too,  it  may  be  said*  that  one  of  the 
specific  diflerences  between  Christ  and  other  founders  of  reUo-ions 
was,  that,  as  he  did  not  impart  a  complete  and  sharply-defined  system 
of  doctrines  to  his  Apostles,  but  left  it  to  their  human  activity,  under 
the  guidance  of  the  Divine  Spirit,  to  form  such  a  system  from  the  ele- 
ments which  he  bestowed, t  so,  also,  he  founded  no  outwardly  complete 
and  accurately  defined  religious  community,  with  a  fixed  form  of  gov- 
ernment, usages,  and  rules  of  worship  ;  but,  after  implanting  the  Divine 
germ  of  this  community,  left  it  also  to  human  agency,  guided  by  the 
same  Holy  Spirit,  to  develope  \hef0r7ns  which  it  should  assume  under 
the  varying  relations  of  human  society.  According  to  this  view,  only 
the  fructifying  elements  were  given  by  Christ,  and  all  the  rest  was  left 
to  human  developement  proper,  animated  by  the  Divine  principle  of 
life. 

According  to  this  view,  the  only  defined  community  which  Christ  es- 
tablished was  that  of  the  Apostles,  who,  as  bearers  and  organs  of  his 
Spirit,  formed  the  sole  prototype  of  the  Chui'ch,  which  only  grew  up 
at  a  later  period  from  the  seed  which  Christ  had  sown.  He  did  not 
wish  to  establish  an  exclusive  school  or  sect,  but  to  draw  all  men  to 
himself.  In  this  view,  further,  it  would  be  necessary  to  suppose  that 
he  had,  at  that  time,  fixed  no  rite  of  initiation  into  his  narrower  fellow- 
ship ;  that  such  passages  as  John,  iii.,  22 ;  Matt.,  xxviii.,  19,  arose  only 
from  the  attempts  of  a  later  period  to  ascribe  the  origin  of  baptism  di- 
rectly to  Christ ;  and  that  baptism,  with  confession  of  the  name  of 
Christ,  was  introduced  by  the  Apostles  subsequently!  to  the  forma- 
tion of  a  separate  Chi-istian  congregation,  as  a  sign  of  membership 
therein.  And  the  high  estimate§  which  was  put  upon  the  rite  may  be 
ascribed,  not  to  its  having  been  instituted  by  Christ,  but  to  the  extraor- 
dinary phenomena  of  inspiration  which  were  wont  to  attend  it. 

We  agree  fully  with  the  fundamental  principle  of  the  view  just 
recited.  Christ  only  prepared  the  way  for  the  foundation  of  the 
Church,  according  to  its  inner  essence  and  its  outward  form  ;  as  he 
gave  no  complete  doctrinal  system,  so  he  erected  no  Church  fabric 
that  was  to  stand  through  all  time ;  his  work  was  rather  to  implant  in 
humanity  the  ncio  spirit,  which  was  to  adapt  to  itself  such  outward 

*  As  is  asserted  by  Wcisse  (p.  387,  seq. ;  406,  seq.),  wliose  views  and  proofs  we  shall  ex- 
amine iu  another  place. 

+  It  is  not  witliout  good  ground,  therefore,  that  we  do  not  devote  a  separate  section  of 
this  work  to  a  systematic  exposition  of  the  doctrines  of  Christ,  but  content  ourselves,  both 
liere  and  in  the  Apostolic  age,  with  pointing  out,  in  his  words,  the  fundamental  principles 
which  were  afterward  expanded  bj'  the  Apostles. 

1   Weisse  thinks  that  the  first  trace  of  the  institution  is  to  be  foimd  in  Acts,  ii.,  38. 

6  The  ecclesiastical  imjwrt  of  baptism  would  remain  untouched,  even  if  it  were  granted 
that  the  sjnnbol  was  first  instituted  by  the  Apostles  at  the  time  of  the  bestovring  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  which  the  rite  symbolized ;  for,  even  in  that  case,  we  must  consider  tliem  as 
Christ's  organs,  and  acting  out  his  will. 


126  THE  MEANS  OF  CHRIST. 

forms  as  would  meet  the  wants  of  human  progress  in  successive  ages. 
But,  while  we  cordially  go  thus  far,  we  do  not  find  ourselves  wan^ant- 
ed,  either  by  history  or  by  the  idea  of  such  a  community,  in  granting 
so  wide  a  latitude  as  the  theory  demands  to  a  principle  so  just  in  itself. 
The  gradual  and  natural  formation  of  the  circle  of  disciples  about 
Christ  is  no  reason  for  believing  that  he  did  not  found  a  Church.  His 
manifestation  to  men  of  different  degrees  of  susceptibility  caused,  in- 
deed, a  sifting  process,  which  soon  separated  the  congregation  of  be- 
lievers from  the  mass  that  rejected  Christ ;  but  the  natural  way  in 
which  this  result  was  brought  about  is  no  argument  against  the  estah- 
hshmcnt  of  the  Church  at  that  time,  more  than  against  its  existence  at 
any  time ;  for,  in  fact,  in  a  certain  sense  this  is  always  the  case.  The 
relations  of  Christ  to  the  world  typified,  in  every  respect,  what  were 
afterward  to  be  the  relations  of  Chistkinity  to  the  world.  We  find 
the  name  of  disciples  applied  with  a  wider  signification  than  that  of 
Apostles  ;  and  why  may  we  not  consider  the  bands  of  these,  scattered 
through  different  parts  of  Palestine,  and  especially  those  who,  apart 
from  tlie  Apostles,  formed  the  constant  retinue  of  Christ,  as  constitu- 
ting the  first  nucleus  of  the  Church  ? 

§  83.  Later  Institution  of  Baptism  as  an  Initiatory  Rite. 

As  for  Bajytisin,  we  certainly  do  not  find,  either  in  the  nature  of  the 
case  or  in  the  historical  accounts,  any  ground  for  assuming  that  Christ 
himself,  during  his  stay  upon  earth,  instituted  it  as  a  symbol  of  conse- 
cration. As  long  as  he  could,  in  2>crso?i,  admit  believers  into  commun- 
ion with  himself,  no  substituted  symbol  was  necessary;  and,  besides, 
the  Holy  Spirit,  which  constitutes  the  essence  of  Christian  baptism, 
and  specifically  distinguishes  it  from  that  of  John,  had  not  as  yet  been 
manifested.  The  element  o^  -jyrcjmration  was  sufficiently  indicated  by 
John's  baptism,  and  tliei'efore  Christ  (in  the  prophetic  words  which 
have  been  preserved  to  us  in  Acts,  i.,  5)  contrasted  that  preparatory 
rite  with  the  spiritual  baptism  which  he  himself  was  soon  to  impart  to 
his  disciples.  The  Apostles,  however  (quite  naturally,  in  view  of  the 
ground  which  they  occupied),  were  unwilling  that  John  alone  should 
baptize,  and  applied  the  rite,  as  the  Messianic  symbol  of  inauguration 
which  Christ  himself  had  recognized,  in  order  to  separate  from  the  rest 
such  as  admitted  the  Divine  calling  of  .Tesus,  and  attached  themselves 
to  him.*  We  cannot  infer  from  this,  however,  that  there  existed  at 
the  time  a  definite  rule  for  the  application  of  baptism.  Yet,  although 
Christ  did  not  command,  he  jpermitted  it,  as  fitted  to  form  a  point  of 
transition  from  John's  to  Christian  baptism. 

But  when  he  was  about  to  withdraw  his  personal  presence  from 
his  disciples,  it  became  necessary  to  substitute  a  symbol  in  its  place. 

".John,  iv.,  2. 


MIRACLES.  127 

His  sufferings  and  resurrection,  the  fundamental  facts  from  which  the 
new  creation,  through  the  Holy  Spirit,  was  to  spring,  had  necessarily 
to  take  place  before  the  institution  of  Christian  baptism  proper;  for 
that  baptism  implies  an  appropriation  of  the  fruit  of  his  sufferino-s,  a 
fellowship  in  his  resurrection,  and  a  participation  of  that  life,  in  com- 
munion with  Him,  whicli  is  above  the  world  and  death.  The  full  im- 
port of  baptism  could  not  be  realized  until  the  process  which  began 
with  Christ's  death  and  resurrection  had  reached  its  consummation; 
until  the  exaltation  had  followed  the  resurrection,  and  the  glorified  Re- 
deemer had  displayed  his  triumphant  power  in  the  outpourinn^  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.  The  same  effects  which  flowed  to  mankind  in  general 
from  these  facts,  and  the  process  which  rested  upon  them,  were  to  be 
repeated  in  every  individual  case  of  baptism. 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 
§  84.  Connexion  of  Christ'' s  Miracles  with  his  Mode  of  Teaching. 
E  have  before  remarked  that  what  most  distinguished  the  Teach- 
ing of  Christ  was,  that  it  was  his  scf -revelation,  and  in  this  viev/ 
it  embraces  both  his  Words  and  Works.  His  Miracles,  then,  must 
be  spoken  of  in  connexion  with  his  mode  of  Teaching.  Although  they 
are  not  to  be  sundered  from  their  connexion  with  his  whole  self-revela- 
tion, yet,  as  an  especially  prominent  feature  of  it,  they  served  the 
highest  purpose,  in  a  certain  sense,  in  vividly  exhibiting  the  nature  of 
Christ,  as  Son  of  God  and  Son  of  Man.  They  have  also  an  additional 
claim  to  be  mentioned  in  this  connexion,  as  they  served  as  a  basis  and 
support  of  his  labours  as  a  teacher,  as  a  preparatory  means  of  leading 
from  sensible  phenomena  to  Divine  things,  and  of  rendering  souls,  as 
yet  bound  to  the  world  of  sense,  susceptible  of  his  higher  Spiritual 
influences. 

In  regard  to  the  Miracles,  three  distinct  inquiries  present  themselves: 
(I.)  What  was  their  real  objective  character  and  relation  to  the  uni- 
verse, and  the  Divine  government  thereof?  (H.)  In  what  view,  and  with 
what  impressions,  did  the  contemporaries  of  Christ  receive  them  \  (III.) 
What  decision  did  Christ  himself  pronounce  as  to  their  nature,  their 
value,  and  the  ends  he  sought  to  accomplish  by  tliem  ? 

(A.)  THE  OBJECTIVE  CHARACTER  OF  MIRACLES. 
§  85.  Negative  Element  of  the  Miracle. — Its  hisnfficimcy. 
We  must  distinguish  in  the  Miracle  a  negative  and  a  j^ositire  ele- 
ment.    The  former  consists  simply  in  this,  that  a  certain  event,  cither 


123  THE   MEANS  OF  CHRIST. 

in  the  world  of  nature  or  man,  is  inexplicable  by  any  known  laws  or 
powers.  Events,  however,  thus  simply  inexplicable,*  and  even  ac- 
knowledged to  be  so,  are  not  miracles,  unless  they  bear  upon  religious 
interests.  Many  will  admit  certain  facts  to  be  inexplicable  by  any 
known  laws,  and  at  the  same  time  refuse  to  grant  them  a  miraculous 
or  supernatural  character.  Some  are  led,  by  an  unprejudiced  admis- 
sion of  the  facts,  to  acknowledge,  without  any  regard  whatever  to  re- 
ligion, that  they  transcend  the  limits  of  existing  science,  and  content 
themselves  with  that  acknowledgment ;  leaving  it  to  the  progress  of 
natural  philosophy  or  psychology  to  discover  the  laws,  as  yet  unknown, 
that  will  explain  the  mysterious  phenomena.  Or,  if  the  narrative  of 
facts  be  such  as  to  preclude  even  the  possibility  of  such  subsequent 
discovery  and  solution,  they  seek  an  explanation  in  ascribing  chasms 
and  deficiencies  to  the  account,  and  withhold,  for  the  time  at  least,  their 
judgment  upon  the  facts  themselves ;  while  a  spur  is  given  to  inquiry 
and  research,  in  order,  if  possible,  by  some  process  of  combination  or 
conjecture,  to  fill  up  the  existing  gaps  of  the  narrative. 

Even  an  objective  (real)  deviation  from  ordinary  phenomena  may  be 
admitted  by  those  who  refuse  to  admit  of  miracles,  in  the  religious 
sense  of  the  term.  That  is,  indeed,  a  narrow  and  ignorant  skepticism 
which  measures  every  thing  by  the  stiff  standard  of  known  laws,  and 
passes  sentence  at  once  upon  every  fact,  no  matter  how  well  attested, 
which  transcends  those  laws ;  but  a  more  profound  and  scientific  phi- 
losophy knows  that  there  are  powers  yet  undiscovered,  which  will  ex- 
plain many  apparent  anomalies.  With  such  minds  we  can  more  readily 
come  to  an  understanding  in  regard  to  the  histoincal  truth  of  a  narra- 
tive of  extraordniary  events.  No  unprejudiced  reader  of  history  can 
deny  the  occuiTence  of  inexplicable  phenomena  in  all  past  ages ;  and 
even  those  of  magnetism,  ill-defined  as  they  are  as  yet,  have  taught  us 
not  to  decide  so  promptly  against  every  thing  that  goes  beyond  our 
knowledge  of  the  powers  of  nature. 

Yet  we  must  not  suppose  that  all  tliis  gains  any  thing  directly  to  the 
cause  of  religion,  within  whose  sphere  alone  the  conception  of  the  mir- 
acle is  a  reality.  It  leaves  us  still  in  the  domain  of  nature  and  of  nat- 
ural agencies.  It  is  not  upon  this  road,  therefore,  that  we  can  lead 
men  to  recognize  the  supernatural  and  the  Divine ;  to  admit  the  j^ow- 
ers  of  heaven  as  manifesting  themselves  upon  earth.  Miracles  belong 
to  a  region  of  holiness  and  freedom,  to  which  neither  experience,  nor 
observation,  nor  scientific  discovery  can  lead.  There  is  no  bridge  be- 
tween this  domain  and  that  of  natural  phenomena.  Only  by  means  of 
our  inward  affinity  for  this  spiritual  kingdom,  only  by  hearing  and 
obeying,  in  the  stillness  of  the  soul,  the  voice  of  God  within  us,  can  we 

•  A  prodii^ium,  or  ripai,  but  no  mii'uoi',  distiuijuishing  these  words  according  to  their 
original  import. 


MIRACLES.  1Q9 

reach  those  lofty  regions.     If  there  be  obstacles  in  our  way,  no  science 
can  remove  them. 

In  fact,  the  mode  of  thinking  to  which  we  have  referred,  instead  of 
necessarily  leading  to  Theism  (the  only  religious  stand-point ;  for  reli- 
gion demands  something  supramundane,  and  must  enter  the  sphere  of 
another  world),  is  perfectly  consistent  with  the  PantJieistic  view  of  the 
world,  and  may  be  used  to  confirm  it.  It  is  not  the  results  of  expe- 
rience which  fix  our  point  of  view ;  but  the  latter,  independently  as- 
sumed on  other  grounds,  gives  character  to  all  our  judgments  of  the 
former.  Nay,  by  applying  natural  laws  to  religious  phenomena,  one 
may  view  new  religions  simply  as  proceeding  from  the  laws  of  the  de- 
velopement  of  the  universe,  in  order  to  form  new  epochs  in  the  history 
of  the  world,  and  thence  consider  the  founders  of  such  religions  as  or- 
gans of  the  soul  of  the  world,  concentrating  in  them  the  hidden  powers 
of  nature.  This  was  the  view  of  Pomporiatius,  who  thought  that  in 
this  way,  while  denying  every  thing  supernatural^  he  could  admit  many 
of  what  others  call  miracles.  It  is  true,  there  are  some  of  the  miracles 
of  the  Bible  which,  on  the  face  of  them,  admit  of  no  such  explanation, 
but  one  who  holds  such  views  will  find  no  great  difficulty  in  doubting 
every  account  of  miraculous  events  which  cannot  be  made  to  harmonize 
with  them ;  as  Pomponatius  did,  who  could  not  with  sincerity,  after  an 
utter  denial  of  the  supernatural,  abandon  his  ground  simply  because 
some  of  the  miracles  could  not  be  explained  by  it. 

§  86.  Positive  Element. —  Tel cological  Aim  of  Miracles. 

Miracles,  then,  are  entirely  different  from  results  oi  \}c\q  iioiccrs  of  na- 
ture intensified.  The  question  of  their  character  cannot  be  decided  on 
the  ground  either  of  Deism  or  Pantheism  (opposed  as  these  theories  are 
to  each  other ;  the  one  incorrectly  separating  the  idea  of  God  from  that 
of  the  world,  the  other  as  incorrectly  blending  the  two  together),  but 
only  in  regard  to  the  Final  causes  of  the  government  of  God,  consider- 
ed as  an  Omniscient  and  Omnipotent  personal  Being.  We  might  dis- 
pute with  these  theories  in  reference  to  \%o\ksXq<S.  facts ,  on  historical  and 
exegetical  grounds  ;  but  the  question  of  miracles,  as  such,  rises  into  a 
very  different  sphere,  and  no  agi-eement  on  separate  points  would  bring 
us  nearer  to  an  adjustment. 

The  -positive  element,  which  must  be  added  to  the  negative  one,  al- 
ready spoken  of,  in  order  to  constitute  any  inexplicable  phenomenon  a 
miracle,  is,  that  the  Divine  power  in  the  phenomenon  itself  shall  reveal 
it  to  our  relio^ious  consciousness  as  a  distinctive  sign  of  a  new  Divine 
communication,  transcending  the  natural  progress  and  powers  of  hu- 
manity, and  designed  to  raise  it  to  a  position  higher  than  its  originally 
created  powers  could  have  reached.  That  higher  position  to  which 
the  Divine  revelations,  accompanied  hy  miracles  as  distinctive  signs, 

I 


130  THE  MEANS  OF  CHRIST. 

were  destined  to  elevate  mankind,  is  the  character  originally  stamped 
by  God  upon  human  nature,  which  was  lost  by  sin,  Man  violently 
sundered  his  union  with  God,  his  true  element  of  life,  in  which  the  Su- 
pernatural and  the  Natural  were  in  perfect  harmony  :  it  was  necessary, 
therefore,  that  the  former  should  reveal  itself  in  opposition  to  the  lat- 
ter— that  Miracles  should  be  opposed  to  Nature — in  order  that  Nature 
might  be  brought  back  to  her  original  harmony  with  God.  But  mira- 
cles, considered  as  signs  of  the  Divinity  revealed  in  the  world  of  sense, 
cannot,  as  such,  be  considered  apart  from  their  connexion  with  the 
whole  revelation  of  God.  Their  essential  nature  is  to  be  discovered, 
not  by  viewing  them  as  isolated  exhibitions  of  Divine  power,  but  as 
elements  of  his  revelation  as  a  whole,  in  the  harmony  of  his  inseparable 
attributes,  the  Holy  Love  and  Wisdom  appearing  as  much  as  the  Om- 
nipotence. It  is  this  which  stamps  Divinity  upon  such  phenomena, 
and  attracts  all  souls  that  are  allied  to  God.  Thus  the  negative  ele- 
ment of  miracles  is  only  a  finger-post  to  the  positive  ;  the  inexplicable 
character  of  the  event  leads  us  to  the  new  revelation,  which  it  accom- 
panies, of  that  same  Almighty  love  which  gave  birth  to  the  laws  of  the 
visible  world,  and  which,  in  ordinary  times,  veils  its  operations  behind 
them. 

§  87.  Relation  of  Miracles  to  the  Course  of  Nature. 

Omnipotence  is  alicays  as  directly  operative  in  nature  as  it  was  at 
the  creation  ;  but  we  can  only  detect  its  workings  by  means  of  the  law 
of  cause  and  effect  in  the  material  world.  Under  this  veil  of  natural 
laws,  religious  faith  always  discovers  the  Divine  causality,  and  the  reli- 
gious mind,  although  it  may,  indeed,  contemplate  natural  phenomena 
from  different  points  of  view,  and  may  distinguish  hetweew  free  and  ne- 
cessary causalities  in  nature,  will  always  trace  them  back  to  the  imme- 
diate agency  of  Almighty  love.  Just  so  in  miracles,  we  do  not  see  the 
Divine  agency  immediatehj,  l)ut  in  a  veil,  as  it  were ;  the  Divine  cau- 
sality does  not  appear  in  them  as  coefficient  with  natural  causes,  and 
therefore  cannot  be  an  object  of  external  perception,  but  reveals  itself 
only  to  Faith.  But  the  miracle,  by  displaying  phenomena  out  of  the 
ordinary  connexion  of  cause  and  effect,  manifests  the  interference  of  a 
higher  power,  and  points  out  a  higher  connexion,  in  which  even  the 
chain  of  phenomena  in  the  visible  world  must  be  taken  up. 

Miracles,  then,  present  themselves  to  us  as  links  in  that  great  chain 
of  manifestations  whose  object  is  to  restore  man  to  his  lost  communion 
with  God,  and  to  impart  to  him  a  life,  not  derived  from  any  created 
causality,  but  immediately  from  (tod.  As  here  new  and  higher  pow- 
ers enter  into  the  sphere  of  humanity,  there  must  be  novel  effects  re- 
sulting from  them,  which  cannot  be  explained  apart  from  the  accom- 
panying revelation,  but  point  out  to  the  religious  consciousness  their 


MIRACLES.  IDl 

self-revealing  cause.  Such  effects  are  the  miracles,  which,  from  tlic 
considerations  we  have  mentioned,  lay  claim,  even  as  inexplicable 
phenomena  simply,  to  a  religious  interest.  And  although,  from  their 
very  nature,  they  transcend  the  ordinary  law  of  cause  and  effect,  they 
do  not  contradict  it,  inasmuch  as  nature  has  been  so  ordered  by  Divine 
wisdom  as  to  admit  higher  and  creative  agencies  into  her  sphere  ;  and 
it  is  perfectly  natural  that  such  powers,  once  admitted,  should  produce 
effects  beyond  the  scope  of  ordinary  causes.*  In  the  Divine  plan  of 
the  universe  (of  whose  fulfilment  the  connexion  of  causes  in  the  visi- 
ble world  manifests  only  one  side),  miracles  stand  in  relations  of  recip- 
rocal harmony  to  events  occurring  in  accordance  with  natural  laws. 
From  the  chain  of  causes  involved  in  that  gi-eat  plan,  indeed,  no  events, 
natural  or  supernatural,  are  excluded  ;  both  circles  of  phenomena  be- 
long to  the  realization  of  the  Divine  idea. 

§  88.  Relation  of  the  individual  Miracles  to  the  highest  Miracle, 
the  Manifestation  of  Christ. 

In  the  miracles  natui'e  is  shown  to  be  related,  like  history,  to  the  one 
highest  aim  of  God's  holy  love,  namely,  the  redemption  of  the  human 
race  to  the  communion  of  the  Divine  life,  or,  what  is  the  same  thing, 
the  establishment  of  His  kingdom  among  men.  Nature  was  destined 
to  reveal  and  glorify  God  ;  but  it  can  only  do  this  in  connexion  with 
rational  beinors,  tosfether  with  whom  it  forms  the  world  as  a  whole. 
Now  the  communion  of  rational  beings,  working  together  with  con- 
scious freedom  to  reveal  and  glorify  God,  is  nothing  else  but  the  king- 
dom of  God ;  and  as  the  unity  which  is  to  exhibit  the  world  as  a  whole 
can  only  be  complete  when  nature  has  been  fully  appropriated  for  the 
revelation  of  that  kingdom,  it  follows  that  the  realization  of  the  latter 
is  the  aim  of  the  whole  creation — of  both  nature  and  history. 

The  manifestation  of  Christ,  the  founder  of  the  kingdom  of  God, 
the  bestower  upon  mankind  of  that  Divine  life  which  constitutes  the  es- 
sence of  the  kingdom,  was  the  highest  miracle,  the  central-point  of  all 
miracles,  and  required  other  and  analogous  phenomena  to  precede  and 
follow  it.  But  as  the  re-establishment  of  the  original  harmony  between 
the  natural  and  the  Divine  (which  coincides  with  the  completion  of  the 
Divine  kingdom)  was  the  final  aim  of  I'cdemption,  so,  when  the  Divine 
life,  the  essential  principle  of  the  miracle  itself,  which  is  purely  and  in 
its  essence  supernatural,  was  incorporated  with  the  natural  progress  of 
humanity  by  the  manifestation  of  Christ,  it  followed  that  thencefor- 
ward, in  all  ages,  it  should  operate  within  the  forms  and  laws  of  human 
nature. 

*  The  Schoolmen  of  the  13th  centitry  rightly  distinguished  the  potcntia  adiva  from  the 
potentia  passiva,  in  regard  to  the  relation  of  the  supernatural  to  the  natural. 


132  THE  MEANS  OF  CHRIST. 

§  89.  Relation  of  Miracles  to  History. 

The  relation  of  miracles  to  history  is  perhaps  sufficiently  obvious 
from  what  has  been  said.  Every  theory  of  history  that  proceeds  from 
the  stand-point  of  natural  reason,  admitting  nothing  superior  to  itself, 
must,  from  its  very  point  of  departure,  reject  the  idea  of  miracles. 
It  must  seek  to  include  and  explain  all  events  by  one  and  the  same 
pragmatical  connexion  of  causes,  and  can  therefore  find  no  place  for 
miracles.  Even  if  it  be  desirous  to  examine  the  acts  of  Christ  without 
prejudice,  it  can  only,  from  its  peculiar  stand-point,  manifest  such  free- 
dom by  representing  truthfully,  according  to  the  accounts  that  remain, 
how  Christ  himself  wished  these  phenomena  to  be  regarded,  and  what 
impression  they  made  upon  his  contemporaries. 

But  this  holds  good  of  only  a  very  limited  and  arbitrary  idea  of 
history,  one  which  barricades  itself  by  its  own  prejudices  against  all 
higher  views.  The  conception  of  the  miracle,  as  such,  is  in  no  way 
repugnant  to  a  really  scientific  theory  of  history ;  and  as  it  is  the  task 
of  the  latter  to  study  the  proper  character  of  every  fact  and  pl>enomenon, 
the  import  of  miracles,  as  miracles,  is  one  of  its  necessary  problems. 
The  manifestation  of  Christ,  indeed,  can  only-  be  rightly  understood 
when  it  is  conceived  as  being  originally  Divine  and  supra-historical, 
and  as  having  become  historical ;  and  Christianity  can  only  be  explain- 
ed as  a  supernatural  principle,  destined  to  impart  to  history  a  new 
tendency  and  direction.  In  this  connexion  the  individual  miracles, 
pteceding,  accomj^anying,  and  following  the  manifestation  of  Christ, 
appear  entirely  in  accordance  with  nature.  As  for  history  itself,  when 
it  does  not  refer  to  Christianity  and  the  kingdom  of  God  as  the  object 
of  all  human  progi-ess,  it  appears  but  as  a  lawless  play  of  forces  moving 
hither  and  thither,  rising  and  falling,  without  aim  and  without  unity. 
Christianity  alone  shows  us  that  it  has  both.  But  in  order  to  compre- 
liend  Christianity,  and,  through  it,  History,  reason  must  receive  the 
higher  light  of  faith,  without  which  the  eye  of  the  mind  must  remain 
blind  to  the  operations  and  revelation  of  the  Divinity  in  the  course  of 
human  progress.* 

(B.)  THE   MIRACLES   OF    CHRIST   AS   SUB.TECTIVELY  VIEWED  BY  HIS 
CONTEMPORARIES. 

§  90.  Miracles  deemed  an  essential  Sign  of  Messiahsliip. 
It  is  evident  from  many  passages  in  the  Gospel  narrative  that  mira- 
cles were   essentially  necessary,   as   signs   of  the   Messianic   calling. 
Had  Christ,  therefore,  wrought  no  miracles,  his  contemporaries  could 

*  My  view  of  the  miracles  aijrccs  with  what  Tucslcn  has  said  in  the  Introduction  to  liis 
"Dogmatik;"  and  I  am  ijTatilied  to  find  a  similar  agreement,  also,  in  his  second  vohimr-, 
pt.  i.,  p.  no,  seq. 


MIRACLES.  133 

not  have  believed  in  his  Messiahship ;  noi-  could  he  himself  have  been 
thoroughly  and  permanently  convinced  of  it,  had  he  not  both  been  con- 
scious of  power  to  perform  them,  and  put  that  power  into  exercise. 
John  the  Baptist  was  satisfied,  from  his  own  inability  to  achieve  such 
works,  that  he  was  not  endowed  with  the  Messianic  fulness  of  the 
Spirit  ;  and  it  is  obvious,  from  his  receiving  Christ's  miracles  as  a 
proof  of  his  Messiahship,  that  he  expected  such  signs  of  the  indwellin"- 
fulness  of  Divine  power  in  the  true  Messiah. 

Nor  can  it  be  proved  (as  some  suppose)  that  it  was  common  among 
the  Jews  to  spread  rumours  of  miracles  wrought  by  men  whose  deeds 
had  made  them  objects  of  popular  veneration,  as  was  subsequently  the 
case  in  the  Middle  Ages,  where  we  find  miraculous  powers  ascribed  to 
such  men  even  during  their  Kfetime.  There  is  a  great  difference  in 
the  relations  of  the  two  periods.  The  Middle  Age  was  the  period  of  a 
neio  creation,  developed  from  the  new  principle  of  life  which  Christian- 
ity (even  alloyed  as  it  was  with  Jewish  elements)  introduced  among 
the  uncultivated  nations.  It  was  a  period  of  youthful  freshness,  en- 
thusiasm, and  poetiy.  The  men  of  that  time,  through  their  lively  faith 
in  the  Divine  power  of  Christianity,  as  ever  present  and  ever  active, 
kept  their  connexion  with  the  miracles  that  attended  its  first  appear- 
ance unbroken,  and  figured  and  imitated  them  by  their  youthful  and 
inventive  power  of  imagination.*  But  while  such  was  the  relation  be- 
tween the  Middle  Age  and  the  period  of  Christ's  appearance,  there 
was  no  similar  relation  between  the  latter  and  the  Old  Testament  age. 
Christ  did  not  manifest  himself  at  a  period  of  new  creation  through  in- 
fluences previously  wrought  into  the  life  of  the  people  by  Judaism,  but 
at  a  time  when  Judaism  itself  was  decaying  and  dying ;  the  revelations 
and  mighty  works  of  Divine  power  lay  buried  in  a  far-distant  antiquity; 
and  there  was  a  vast  chasm,  visible  to  all  eyes,  between  the  lofty,  holy 
age  of  Prophecy,  and  that  weak  and  lifeless  time.  After  the  voice  of 
prophecy  was  hushed,  God  was  said  to  reveal  himself  only  by  occa- 
sional utterances ;  such,  for  instance,  as  the  Bath  Col,\  a  miraculous 
sound  from  heaven ;  or  by  words  of  men,  intei-preted  as  omens. 
Scarcely  any  tales  of  wonder  were  told  but  such  as  refen-ed  to  the 
Exorcists^  who  were  skilled  in  the  deceptive  arts  of  jugglery,  and  were 
said  to  do  many  marvellous  things.  In  short,  it  is  sufficiently  proved 
that  miracles  were  deemed  no  ordinary  occurrences  among  the  Jews,§ 

*  The  miraculous  tales  of  the  excited  Middle  Age  may  be  explained  from  the  co-working 
of  various  influences,  but  this  is  not  the  place  to  enter  into  the  subject. 

t  The  Bath  Col  may  be  explained  on  the  ground  that  a  heavenly  voice  was  supposed  to 
be  heard  in  a  period  of  devotion,  or  that  words  accidentally  spoken  by  one  person  had  a 
peculiar  subjective  meaning  for  another,  like  the  tolle  hgc  of  Augustine. 

X  Joseph.,  Archa3ol.,  viii.,  2,  4. 

^  Josephus  says,  with  reference  to  miracles,  ''  ""  T^apaXoya  Koi  iJtd^io  njf  tXiriSos  roij  hfioioii 
TuoTovTai  Ttpdynaiiv." — Archoeol.,  x.,  2,  1. 


134  THE  MEANS  OF  CHRIST. 

by  the  fact  that  they  were  expected  to  be  distinctive  signs  of  the 
Messiah,  and  that  they  were  not  ascribed  even  to  John  the  Baptist, 
notwithstanding  his  great  deeds  and  the  honour  in  which  he  was  held 
as  a  prophet. 

(C.)  CHRIST'S  OWN  ESTIMATE  OF  HIS  MIRACLES. 
§  91.  Apparent  Discrejmncics,  and  Mode  of  Removing  them. 
There  are  apparent  contradictions  in  the  several  explanations  triven 
by  Christ  of  his  miracles,  and  by  following  them  out  separately  we 
might  arrive  at  different  views  of  the  estimate  which  he  himself  placed 
upon  them.  But  in  order  to  bring  perfect  harmony  out  of  these  ap- 
parent contradictions,  it  is  only  necessary  to  distinguish  the  different 
points  of  view  in  which  the  miracles  present  themselves.  It  has  been 
already  said,  that  miracles  can  be  correctly  understood,  not  when  view- 
ed as  isolated  facts,  but  in  connexion  with  the  whole  circle  of  Divine 
revelation.  Those  of  Christ,  especially,  are  intelligible  only  when 
considered  as  results  of  his  self-revelation,  or,  as  St.  John  expresses  it, 
as  ihe  mdnifestation  of  his  glory.  They  demand,  therefore,  to  be  so  con- 
ceived in  connexion  as  to  exhibit  vividly  his  whole  image  in  each  of 
these  separate  manifestations  ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  the  same  con- 
siderations point  out,  as  the  highest  aim  of  miracles,  the  revelation  of 
Christ's  glory  in  the  whole  of  his  personal  manifestation. 

Cl.)  Christ's  Object  in  working  Miracles  tvvo-fokl. 

In  \\\e\x  formal  import  miracles  are  crwida,  signs,  designed  to  point 
from  objects  of  sense  to  God  ;  powers  which,  by  producing  results  in- 
explicable by  ordinary  agencies,  are  intended  to  lead  minds  yet  under 
the  bonds  of  sense,  and  unfitted  for  an  immediate  spiritual  revelation,  to 
yearn  after  and  acknowledge  a  higher  power.  But  as  they  were  de- 
signed to  show  forth  the  icholc  revealed  Christ,  and  as  the  Divine  attri- 
butes, in  the  totality  of  which  the  image  of  God  was  realized  in  him,  can- 
not be  isolated  from  each  other,  so  no  separate  manifestation  o? poiver 
could  proceed  from  him,  not  at  the  same  time  exhibiting  all  the  other 
attributes  belonging  to  the  Divine  image.  It  is  clear,  therefore,  that 
although  miracles,  in  relation  to  nature,  are  especially  manifestations 
of  Power,  they  could  not  be  performed  except  in  cases  where  the  other 
attributes,  the  Wisdom  and  the  holy  Love,  were  brought  into  requisi- 
tion. For  the  same  reason,  too,  we  cannot  conceive  Christ's  miracles  as 
epideictic,  i.  e.,  wrought  for  no  other  purpose  than  to  display  his  power 
over  the  laws  of  nature.  In  them,  as  in  all  his  other  actions,  the  end 
which  he  had  in  view  is  shown  by  the  given  circumstances  in  each  case. 

Accordingly,  we  distinguish  a  two-fold  object  of  his  miracles,  tlie  first 
a  material  one,  ?'.  e.,  the  meeting  of  some  immediate  emergency,  of  some 
want  of  man's  earthly  life,  which  his  love  urged  him  to  satisfy ;  the 


MIRACLES.  135 

other  and  higher  one,  to  point  himself  out  to  the  persons  whose  earthly 
necessities  were  thus  relieved j  as  the  One  alone  capable  of  satisfying- 
their  higher  and  essential  spiritual  wants ;  to  raise  them  from  this  sin- 
gle exhibition  of  his  glory  in  the  individual  miracle  to  a  vivid  appre- 
hension of  the  glory  of  his  entire  nature.  Nor  was  this  last  and  higher 
aim  of  the  miracle  confined  to  the  persons  immediately  concerned  ;  it 
was  to  be  to  all  others  a  sign,  that  they  might  believe  in  Jesus  as  the 
Son  of  God.  • 

{'2.)  A  Susceptibility  to  i-eceive  Impressions  from  the  Miracles  presupposed. 

But  all  external  influences  designed  to  produce  an  impression  such 
as  we  have  stated  demand  a  susceptible  soil  in  the  minds  of  those  who 
are  to  receive  them.  The  revelation  of  Christ  by  his  works,  no  more 
than  by  his  vs^ords,  could  produce  a  Divine  impression  without  an  in- 
ward susceptibility  of  Divine  influences.  The  consciousness  of  Goi> 
must  exist  in  the  soul,  though  dormant.  The  Divine  revelation  must 
find  some  point  of  contact  in  human  nature  before  religious  faith  can 
spring  up ;  there  is  no  compulsory  influence  from  without  by  which 
the  unsusceptible  soul  can  be  driven  to  faith  by  an  irresistible  ne- 
cessity. 

So,  when  a  carnal,  worldly  mind  is  the  prevailing  tendency,  out- 
ward phenomena,  however  extraordinary,  pass  by,  and  make  no  im- 
pression. The  mighty  power  of  the  will  cannot  be  subdued  by  any  ex- 
ternal force.  The  worldly  spirit  malces  every  thing  which  touches  it 
worldly  too.  Encompassed  by  Divine  powers,  it  remains  closed  against 
them,  in  its  earthly  inclinations,  thoughts,  and  feelings.  The  mind, 
thus  perverted,  cheats  itself  by  denying  all  miracles,  because  to  ac- 
knowledge them  would  oppose  its  fleshly  interests,  and  contradict  the 
system  of  delusion  to  which  it  is  a  slave.  It  calls  the  powers  of  sophis- 
try to  aid  its  self-deception,  by  converting  every  thing  which  could 
tend  to  undeceive  it  into  a  means  of  deeper  delusion ;  like  those  Phar- 
isees who,  when  compelled  to  acknowledge  works  beyond  explanaticin 
by  ordinary  agencies,  referred  them  to  the  powers  of  darkness  rather 
than  of  light,  in  order  to  escape  an  admission  which  they  were  deter 
mined  to  evade.  So  he  who  totally  rejects  the  supernatural  has  al 
ready  decided  upon  all  separate  cases,  and  a  miracle  wrought  before 
his  very  eyes  would  not  be  recognized  as  such.  He  might  admit  the 
fact  as  extraordinary,  but  would  involuntarily  seek  some  other  expla- 
nation. A  mode  of  thinking  that  controls  the  mind  cannot  be  shaken 
by  any  power  acting  ^clwlhj  from  without.  Such  is  the  might  of  the 
free  will,  which  proves  its  freedom  even  by  its  self-created  bondage. 

Or  if  miracles  do  impress  the  fleshly  mind  for  a  moment  by  the  flash 
of  gratiiication  or  astonishment  which  they  afford,  the  impression,  made 
merely  upon  the  senses,  is  but  transitory ;  for  it  lacks  the  point  of  con- 


136  THE  MEANS  OF  CHRIST. 

tact  in  the  soul  which  aloue  can  make  it  permanent.  How  quickly  are 
sensible  imi3ressions,,even  the  strongest,  forgotten  when  other  and  con- 
trary ones  follow  them !  And  here  we  find  one  of  the  reasons  why 
Christ  refused  the  demand  for  miracles  merely  as  proofs  of  his  wonder- 
working power.  For  those,  he  said,  whose  perverted  minds  could  not 
be  roused  to  repentance  by  Moses  and  the  prophets,  would  not  he  per- 
suaded though  one  rose  from  the  dead. 

How  grossly  ignorant,  then,  of  human  nature  must  the  Deists  of  the 
17th  century  have  been,  who  plead  in  opposition  to  the  reality  of 
Christ's  miracles,  the  comparatively  little  effect  which  they  produced  !* 

We  shall  find,  therefore,  Christ's  own  statements  in  regard  to  his 
miracles  to  harmonize  perfectly  with  each  other,  if  we  properly  dis- 
tinguish the  various  classes  of  human  character  in  their  religious  and 
moral  relations  to  miracles,  and  the  different  relations  and  tendencies 
of  the  miracles  themselves. 

§  92.  The  Sign  of  the  Trophet  Jonah. 
^  Christ's  declaration,  in  answer  to  a  demand  for  a  miraculous  attesta- 
tion  of  his  Messiahship,  that  "  no  sign  shall  he  given  to  this  generation 
hut  the  sign  of  the  Trophet  Jonah;'  has  been  thought  by  some  to  indi- 
cate  either  that  he  wrought  no  miracles  at  all,  or  that  he  did  not  mean 
to  employ  them  as  proofs  of  his  Divine  calling.  The  passage  prece- 
ding that  declaration  of  itself  is  enough  to  refute  this ;  for  he*had  just 
appealed  to  the  healing  of  a  demoniac  as  proof  of  the  Divine  charac- 
ter of  his  power,t  and  to  the  fact  that  the  kingdom  of  God  was  victori- 
ously introduced  among  men  by  him|  as  a  testimony  that  his  ministry 
was  Divine.  But  we  can  refute  it  by  simply  showing  the  only  sense 
which  the  words  could  have  conveyed,  in  the  connexion  in  which  they 
were  used. 

The  works  of  Jesus  had  made  a  great  impression,  very  much  to  the 
discomfort  of  those  whose  mode  of  thinking  and  party  interests  made  it 
necessary  for  them  to  oppose  him.  They  naturally  sought  to  counter- 
act this  impression ;  to  dispute  the  evidence  of  the  facts  which  con- 
firmed his  ministry  as  Divine.     While  the  most  base  and  hostile,  com- 

*  Like  that  strange  enthusiast,  Dardd  lluller, -who  appeared  in  Nassau  iu  the  ti-ausition 
I)^eriod  between  mysticism  and  rationahsm,  and  in  whom  these  two  tendencies  joined  liands. 
From  the  extreme  of  mystic  supeniaturalism  he  passed  over  to  the  skeptical  conclusions  of 
our  modern  critics.  In  his  treatise  against  Lessinsr  he  says,  "It  is  impossible  that  there 
should  have  been  a  Christ  1700  years  ago,  who  literally  wrought  such  wonders  as  these. 
Had  any  man,  by  his  more  word,  caused  tiie  blind  to  see  and  the  lame  to  walk,  given  health 
to  the  leper  and  strength  to  the  palsied,  fed  thousands  with  a  few  loaves,  and  even  raised 
t)ie  dead,  all  men  must  have  esteemed  him  Divine,  all  men  must  have  followed  him.  Only 
imagine  what  you  yourself  would  have  thouglit  of  such  a  man ;  and  human  nature  is  the 
same  in  all  ages.  And  with  so  many  followers,  the  scribes  and  Dharisecs  could  not  have 
killed  him."— //^'c/t's  Zeitschrifl,  Wii,  p.  257. 

t  Luke,  xi.,  20.  J  Ly],g^  ^i^  22. 


MIRACLES.  137 

pelled  to  admit  the  superhuman  powers  of  Christ,  attributed  them  to 
the  kingdom  of  darkness,  there  were  others  who  did  not  dare  to  utter 
such  an  accusation,  but  asked  a  sign  of  a  different  character,  an  object- 
ive testimony  from  God  himself  in  favor  of  Christ  and  his  ministry, 
which  could  not  deceive ;  a  visible  celestial  phenomenon,  for  instance, 
or  a  voice  from  heaven,  clearly  and  unequivocally  authenticating  him 
as  a  messenger  from  God.  In  answer,  then,  to  those  who  asked  a  Di- 
vine sign  apart  from  his  whole  manifestation,  a  sign  for  that  which  was 
of  itself' the  greatest  of  all  signs,  Christ  appeals  to  that  loftiest  of 
signs,  his  own  appearance  as  the  God-Man,  which  included  within  it- 
self all  his  miracles  as  separate,  individual  manifestations.*  To  this 
(he  told  them) — viz.,  that  "  The  manifestation  of  the  Son  of  Man  was 
greater  than  that  of  Jonah  or  of  Solomon" — belonged  all  those  works 
of  his  which  no  other  could  perform  ;  every  thing  was  to  be  referred  to 
that  manifestation  as  the  highest  in  the  histoi'y  of  humanity.  Had  these 
words  been  spoken  by  any  other,  they  would  have  convicted  him  of 
sacrilegious  self-exaltation. 

§  93.  "  Destroy  this  Temple,''  ^c. 
Similar  to  this  was  Christ's  reply  at  the  Passover,  which  he  first  kept 
in  Jerusalem,  to  those  who,  unable  to  comprehend  an  act  of  holy  zeal, 
asked  him  to  prove  his  calling  as  a  reformer  by  a  miracle — "  Destroy 
this  temple^  and  in  three  days  I  tvill  raise  it  up!'  Instead  of  working 
a  mii-acle,  uncalled  for  by  the  circumstances,  for  their  idle  satisfaction, 
he  pointed  them  to  a  sign  that  was  to  come,  a  gi'eat,  world-historical 
sign,  which  may  have  been  either  his  resurrection,  that  was  to  seal  the 
cimclusion  of  his  ministry  on  earth,  and  bring  about  the  triumph  of  his 
kingdom,  in  spite  of  the  machinations  of  his  foes,  who  hoped  to  destroy 
his  work  by  putting  him  to  death  ;  or  the  creation,  as  the  end  and  aim 
of  his  whole  manifestation,  of  the  new,  spiritual,  and  eternal  Temple  of 
his  kingdom  among  men,  after  the  visible  Temple  should  have  been 
destroyed  by  their  own  guilt. 

§  94.  Christ' s  Distinction  between  the  material  Elcnie7it  of  Miracles 
and  their  essential  Ohjcct. — John,  vi.,  26. 

Christ  himself  distinguishes  the  material  part  of  the  miracle,  ^.  e.,  its 
effect  in  satisfying  a  momentary  want,  and  \ts  formal  part,  as  a  sign  to 
point  from  objects  of  sense  to  God,  and  to  accredit  himself  as  capable  of 

*  We  caunot  but  be  surprised  at  the  remark  of  Dc  Wctte,  Comm.  on  Matt.,  2d  ed..  p. 
132:  "If  Jesus  had  wished  to  express  this  thought,  he  would  have  uttered  nonsense — 
No  sign  ahall  be  given  to  them,  hut  still  given."  Christ  said  that  to  those  who  were 
not  satisfied  by  liis  whole  manifestation,  as  a  sign,  no  other  separate  sign  would  be  s^iv- 
en ;  how  could  any  thing  be  a  sign  for  them  to  whom  the  highest  sign  was  none?  The 
words,  however,  do  wear  that  air  of  paradox  which  we  often  find  in  the  discourses  of 
Christ. 


138  THE  MEANS  OF  CHRIST. 

satisfying  all  higher  spiritual  wants.  To  those  who  embraced  the  mira- 
cles in  this  latter  sense,  properly  as  arjiiela,  he  freely  communicated  him- 
self; and,  on  the  other  hand,  he  must  more  and  more  have  alienated 
himself  from  those  who  attached  themselves  to  him  only  from  a  mo- 
mentary interest  of  the  former  kind.  He,  therefore,  reproached  those 
who  eagerly  sought  him  after  the  feeding  of  the  five  thousand,  by  say- 
ing that  they  did  not  seek  him  because  they  "  had  seen  the  miracles'^ 
{f.  e.,  as  signs  to  lead  them  to  something  higher),  but  simply  because 
their  human  wants  had  been  satisfied — "  Ye  did  eat  of  the  loaves  and 
tcerc  filled^  The  light  of  his  works  (he  told  them)  was  not  sufficient 
to  lead  them  to  believe  on  him,  inasmuch  as  they  lacked — what  was  es- 
sential to  faith — a  sense  for  the  Divine.  The  gratification  of  their  natu- 
ral senses  was  all  they  sought.  In  the  spirit  in  which  they  were,  faith 
was  impossible  ;  their  preponderating  worldliness  of  mind,  subjugating 
the  better  tendencies  of  their  natui'e,  left  room  for  no  sense  of  higher 
wants,  and  prevented  them  from  feeling  the  inward  '"'^  drawing  of  the 
Father:'* 

§  95.  Christ  a2^pcalcd  to  the  Miracles  as  Testimonies  ;  John,  xv.,  24. — 
Three  different  Stages  of  Faith. 

Although  Christ  appeals  (in  John's  Gospel)  to  the  miracles  as  testi- 
monies of  his  works,  we  are  not  to  understand  him  as  appealing  tt) 
them  simply  as  displays  of  power,  for  the  grounds  already  stated.  Yet 
he  does,  in  more  than  one  instance,  declare  them  to  be  signs,  in  the 
world  of  sense,  of  a  higher  power,  designed  to  lead  minds  as  yet  un- 
susceptible of  direct  spiritual  impressions,  to  acknowledge  such  influ- 
ences. '^  If  I  had,  not  done  among  them  the  works  which  none  other  man 
did,  they  had  not  had  *i«."t 

In  viewing  the  miracles  thus  as  means  of  awakening  and  strengthen- 
ing faith,  we  must  distinguish  different  stand-points  in  the  developement 
of  faith.  On  the  lowest  stage  stood  those  who,  instead  of  being  drawn 
by  an  undeniable  want  of  their  spiritual  nature,  inspired  by  the  power 
of  God  working  within  them,  had  to  be  attracted  by  a  feeling  of  phys- 
ical want,  and  by  impressions  made  upon  their  outward  senses.  Yet, 
like  his  heavenly  Father,  whose  providence  leads  men  to  spiritual 
things  even  by  means  of  their  physical  necessities,  Christ  condescended 
to  this  human  weakness,  sighing,  at  the  same  time,  that  such  means 
should  be  indispensable  to  turn  men's  eyes  to  that  which  lies  nearest  to 
their  spiritual  being.  "  Except  ye  see  signs  and  rvondcrs,  ye  will  not 
Lclieve."'^ 

A  higher  stage  was  occupied  by  those  who  were,  indeed,  led  to  seek 
the  Messiah  by  a  sense  of  spiritual  need,  but  whose  religious  feelings 
were  debased  by  the  admixture  of  various  sensuous  elements.    As  these 

*  John,  vi.,  36,  44.  t  John,  xv.,  24.  t  John,  iv.,  48. 


MIRACLES.  139 

were  yet  in  some  degree  in  bondage  to  sense,  and  sought  the  Saviour 
without  perfectly  apprehending  him  as  the  object  of  tlieir  searcli,  they 
had  to  be  led  to  know  him  by  miracles  suited  to  their  condition.  Such 
was  the  case  with  the  Apostles  generally,  before  their  religious  feeliuo^s 
were  purified  by  continued  personal  intercouree  with  Christ.  He  con- 
descended to  this  condition,  in  order  to  lead  men  from  it  to  a  higher 
stage  of  religious  life ;  but  yet  represented  it  as  subordinate  to  that 
purer  stage  in  which  they  should  receive  the  whole  impression  of  his 
person,  and  obtain  a  full  intuition  of  the  mode  in  which  God  dwelt  and 
wrought  in  Him.  Jesus  said  unto  Nathanael,  "  Because  I  said  I  saw 
thee  under  the  jig-tree,  helievest  thou  1  TJiou  shalt  see  greater  things  than 
these.  Hereafter  ye  shall  see  heaven  open,  and  the  angels  of  God  ascend- 
ing and  descending  upon  the  Son  of  M.anJ''* 

A  far  loftier  stage  of  faith  was  that  which,  proceeding  from  an  in- 
ward living  fountain,  did  not  wait  for  miracles  to  call  it  forth,  but  went 
before  and  expected  them  as  natural  manifestations  of  the  already  ac- 
knowledged God.  Such  a  presupposed  faith,  instead  of  being  sum- 
moned by  the  miracles,  rather  summoned  them,  as  did  the  pagan  cen- 
turion whom  Christ  offered  to  the  Jews  as  a  model :  "  I  have  not  found 
so  great  faith,  no,  not  in  Israeiy\ 

It  appears,  therefore,  that  Christ  considered  that  to  be  the  highest 
stage  of  religious  developement  in  which  faith  arose,  not  from  the  sen- 
sible evidence  of  miracles,  but  from  an  immediate  Divine  impression 
finding  a  point  of  contact  in  the  soul  itself — from  a  direct  experience 
of  that  wherein  alone  the  soul  could  fully  satisfy  its  wants  ;  such  a  faith  as 
testifies  to  previous  motions  of  the  Divine  life  in  the  soul.  We  have  an 
illustration  in  Peter,  who  expressed  his  profound  sense  of  the  blessincrs 
that  had  flowed  to  him  from  fellowship  with  Christ,  in  his  acknowl- 
edgment, "  Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God.  AnA.  Jesus 
said  unto  him.  Blessed  art  thou,  Simon  Barjona,  for  flesh  and  blood  hath 
not  revealed  it  unto  thee,  hut  my  Father  ivhich  is  in  heaven."\  This  ac- 
knowledgment itself  might  have  been  made  by  Peter  at  an  earlier  pe- 
riod ;  but  the  ivay  in  which  he  made  it  at  that  critical  moment,  and  the 
feeling  which  inspired  it,  showed  that  he  had  obtained  a  new  intuition 
of  Christ  as  the  Son  of  God.  It  was  for  this  that  Christ  called  him 
"blessed,"  because  the  drawing  of  the  Father  had  led  him  to  the  Son, 
and  the  Father  had  revealed  himself  to  him  in  the  Son.  Peter  made 
his  confession,  at  that  time,  in  opposition  to  others, §  who,  although  they 
had  a  dawning  consciousness  of  Christ's  higher  nature,  did  not  yet  rec 
ognize  him  as  the  Son  of  God.  The  spirit  in  which  he  made  it  is  illus- 
trated by  a  similar  confession  made  by  him  in  view  of  the  defection  of 
many  who  had  been  led  by  "  the  revelation  of  flesh  and  blood"  to  be- 

*  John,  i.,  50,  51.  t  Matt.,  viii.,  10. 

\  Matt.,  xvi.,  16,  17.  §  Mr.tt.,  xvi.,  14. 


140  THE  MEANS  OF  CHRIST. 

lieve  in  Jesus,  and  had  afterward  abandoned  him,*  for  the  very  reason 
that  their  faith  had  so  low  an  origin :  "  Lord,  to  whom  shall  we  go  ?  Thou 
hast  the  words  of  eternal  life.  And  we  believe,  and  we  are  sure  that  thou 
art  that  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God.^^\ 

And  so,  when  Thomas  doubted,  Christ  condescended  to  give  him  a 
visible  proof  of  his  resurrection  ;|  but  at  the  same  time  he  declared  that 
that  was  a  higher  faith  which  needed  no  such  support,  but  rested,  with 
undoubting  confidence,  upon  the  inward  experience  of  Divine  mani- 
festations.    "  Blessed  are  they  that  have  not  sce7i  and  yet  have  helievcdy 

§  96.  The  Communication  of  tJie  Divine  Life  the  highest  Miracle. — 
John,  xiv.,  12. 
Finally,  the  words  of  Christ  himself  assure  us  that  the  communica- 
tion of  the  life  of  God  to  men  was  the  gi'eatest  of  all  miracles,  the  es- 
sence and  the  aim  of  all;  and,  further,  that  it  was  to  be  the  standing 
miracle  of  all  after  ages.  "  He  that  hclieveth  on  me,  the  tvorks  that  I  do 
ahull  he  do  also,  and  greater  works  than  these  shall  he  do,  because  I  go 
to  my  Father.  And  tvhatsoever  ye  shall  ask  in  my  name,  tliat  will  I  dv, 
that  the  FatJter  may  be  glorified  in  the  Son.''''  The  power  of  diffusing 
the  Divine  life,  which  had  been  confined  to  him  alone,  was,  by  means 
of  his  gloi'ification,  to  be  extended  to  others,  and  to  assume  in  them  a 
peculiar  self-subsisting  form — the  miracle  which  was  to  be  wrought 
among  all  men,  and  in  all  time,  by  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel.  ["  He 
shall  send  you  another  Comforter,  that  he  may  abide  with  you  forever, 
even  the  Sjnrit  of  Truth.'"] 


CHAPTER  VI. 

THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST  CONSIDERED  IN  REGARD  TO  SUPERNAT 

URAL  AGENCY. 

§  97.  Transition  from  the  Natural  to  the  Supernatural  in  the  Miracles. 
T  has  been  asserted  in  modern  times,  that  in  order  to  receive  mira- 
cles at  all,  we  must  conceive  them  as  directly  and  abruptly  opposed  to 
nature,  and  admit  no  intermediate  agencies  whatever.  But  we  cannot 
be  confined  to  this  alternative  by  men  who  wish  to  caricature  the  views 
which  we  maintain.  Abrupt  contrasts  may  be  set  up  in  abstract  the- 
ories ;  but  in  real  life  we  do  not  find  them.  There  are  always  inter- 
mediate agencies  and  points  of  transition.  And  why  should  this  not  be 
the  case  in  the  opposition  between  the  natural  and  the  supernatural  1 
We  think  that  we  have  already  shown  that  the  higher  unity  of  the  Di- 
vine plan  of  the  world  embraces  miracles  as  well  as  the  ordinary  de- 
*  John,  vi.,  CG.  t  John,  vi.,  69.  }  Jolui,  xx..  27. 


THE  HEALING  OF  DISEASES.  141 

velopement  of  nature.  We  hold  ourselves  justified,  therefore,  in  dis- 
tinguishing, with  regard  to  the  marvellous  part  of  the  miracles,  certain 
steps  of  transition  from  the  natural  to  the  supernatural.  Not  that  we 
can  separate  these  gradations  so  nicely  as  to  constitute  a  division  of  the 
miracles  thereby ;  but  we  can  trace  an  important  harmonj^  with  tlio 
universal  laws  of  the  Divine  government  of  the  world  in  the  fact  that 
here,  too,  there  are  no  sudden  leaps,  but  a  gradual  transition  by  inter- 
mediate steps  throughout. 

Looking  at  all  the  miracles,  there  are  some  in  regard  to  which  it 
may  be  doubted  whether  they  belong  to  the  class  of  natural  or  super- 
natural events  ;  on  the  other  side,  there  are  some  in  which  the  creative 
power  is  exhibited  in  the  highest  degree,  and  which  bear  no  analogy 
whatever  to  the  results  of  natural  causes.  Between  these  extreme 
classes,  there  are  many  miraculous  worlis  in  which  the  supernatural 
can  be  made  vividly  obvious  by  means  of  natural  analogies.  To  these 
last  belong  most  of  the  miracles  which  Christ  wrought  upon  linman 
nature;  while  those  wrought  upon  the  material  world,  rejecting  all 
natural  analogies,  may  be  ranged  under  the  second  extreme  class 
above  mentioned.  The  latter  are  very  few  in  compai'ison  with  the 
former,  and  far  less  intimately  connected  with  Christ's  peculiar  calling. 

A.  CHRIST'S  MIRACLES  WROUGHT  UPON  HUMAN  NATURE. 
I.  The  Healing  of  Diseases. 
^  98.  The  Spiritual  Agencies  emploijed. — Faith  demanded  for  the  Cure. 
Those  works  of  redeeming  love  which  Christ  wrought  upon  the  human 
body,  the  healing  of  diseases,  and  the  like,  displayed  the  peculiar  feature 
of  his  whole  ministry.  The  ailments  of  the  body  are  closely  connected 
with  those  of  the  soul  ;*  and  even  if,  in  individual  cases,  this  cannot  be 
proved,  yet  in  the  whole  progress  of  human  developement  there  is  al- 
ways a  causal  connexion  between  sin  and  evil ;  between  the  disorgan- 
ization of  the  spirit  through  sin,  and  all  forms  of  bodily  disorder 
There  was  a  beautiful  connexion,  therefore,  between  Christ's  work  in 
healing  the  latter,  and  his  proper  calling  to  remove  the  fundamental 
disease  of  human  nature,  and  to  restore  its  original  harmony,  disturbed 
by  sin. 

Some  of  these  diseases,  also,  arose  purely  from  moral  causes,  and 
could  be  thoroughly  cured  only  by  moral  and  spiritual  remedies. 
Little  as  we  know  of  the  connexion  between  the  mind  and  the  body, 

*  It  is  remarkable  that  great  plai,iics  often  spread  over  the  earth  precisely  at  the  same 
time  with  general  crises  in  the  intellectual  or  moral  world ;  e.  g.,  the  plague  at  Athens  and 
the  Peloponnesian  war  ;  the  plagues  under  the  Antouines  and  under  Decius  ;  the  labes  in- 
guinaria  at  the  end  of  the  6th  century  ;  the  ignis  saccr  in  the  11th;  the  Mack  death  in  the 
14th,  (See.  That  great  man,  Niebuhr,  whose  letters  contain  so  many  golden  ti-uths,  alluded 
to  tliis  coincidence  in  ajiother  coouexion. — Leben,  ii.,  167. 


142  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 

we  know  enough  to  make  it  in  some  degree  clear  to  us  how  an  ex- 
traordinary Divine  impression  might  produce  remarkable  effects  in  the 
bodily  organism. 

We  do  not  mean,  however,  by  this  remark,  to  bring  all  such  influ- 
ences down  (as  some  have  done)  into  the  sphere  of  the  purely  sub- 
jective. It  is  true  that  a  natural  power,  -highly  intensified,  might 
produce  effects  closely  resembling  the  supernatural ;  it  is  true  that  the 
imagination,  strongly  stimulated  and  exalted,  often  works  strange 
wonders  ;  but  we  have  to  do'  here  only  with  effects  which  must  be  at- 
tributed to  higher  causes,  which  must  be  due  to  an  objective  Divine 
agency.  In  the  cases  to  which  we  refer  (as,  indeed,  in  all  cases),  the 
objective  and  subjective  factors  could  co-operate  ;  the  Divine  influence 
of  Christ  upon  the  soul,  and,  through  it,  upon  the  bodily  organism, 
could  work  together  with  the  susceptibility  to  impression,  the  reccjHwity 
(so  to  speak),  on  the  pait  of  man.  Hence  it  was  that  Christ  demanded 
a  special  Faith  as  a  necessary  condition  of  his  healing  agency ;  indeed, 
we  can  find  no  instance  of  his  working  a  miracle  where  a  hostile  tend- 
ency of  mind  prevailed. 

We  can  conceive  of  bodily  cures  thus  wrought  by  means  of  spiritual 
influences  more  readily  than  any  othei'S  ;  and  they  con-espond  precise- 
ly with  the  laws  which  Christ's  operations  have  never  ceased  to  follow. 
But  we  cannot  bring  all  the  instances  of  healing  which  he  wrought 
under  this  class  ;  some  of  them  were  wrought  at  a  distance,  and  offer 
no  point  of  departure  of  this  kind.  And  as  we  are  compelled  to  ad- 
mit, in  some  of  the  miracles,  immediate  operations  upon  material 
nature,  we  are  the  less  authorized  to  deny  that  such  direct  influences 
were  exerted  upon  the  bodily  organism. 

§  99.    Vsc  of  Physical  Agencies  in  the  Cure  of  Diseases. 

Christ  employed  his  miraculous  power  in  various  modes  of  opera- 
tion. He  operated  by  his  immediate  presence,  by  the  power  of  that 
Divire  will  which  exercised  its  influence  through  his  word  and  his 
whole  manifestation ;  and  this  in  the  very  cases  in  which  we  might  ad- 
mit a  bodily  cure  by  the  use  of  physical  agencies.  Sometimes,  indeed, 
there  was  besides  a  material  aj)plication,  e.g.,  the  contact  of  the  hand. 
In  other  cases  he  made  use  of  material  substances,  and  even  of  such 
as  were  thought  to  be  possessed  of  healing  virtues,  as,  in  blindness,  of 
saliva,*  watcr,t  and  anointing  with  oil. 

But  in  these  cases  the  means  were  too  dis])roportionate  to  the  results, 
fjr  us  to  imagine  that  they  were  naturally  ca])able  of  producing  them; 
and  as  Christ  did  not  always  employ  them,  there  is  no  room  to  sup- 
pose that  they  were  necessary  as  vehicles  of  his  healing  power — a  stip- 
position  which  brings  the  miracles  too  far  down  into  the  sphere  of 
'  Plin.,  Hist.  Natur.,  xxviii.,  7.  \  Mark,  viii.;  John,  ix. 


PUNITIVE  JUSTICE.  143 

merely  physical  agencies.  We  must  rather  presuppose  that  as  Christ, 
in  his  teaching,  &c.,  took  up  the  forms  in  common  use  among  men  to 
work  out  something  higher  from  them,  so  he  allowed  his  powers  of 
healing  to  exhibit  themselves  in  the  use  of  these  ordinary  means  in  a 
symbolical  way.  He  may  have  designed  thereby  to  bestow  some 
peculiar  lessons  of  instruction. 

The  cures  wrought  at  a  distance  do  not  admit  of  this  material  con- 
necting link  ;  but  the  opei'ations  of  Christ's  will  could  oversteji  all  the 
barriers  of  space. 

§  100.   The  Relation  hdioecn  Sin  and  Physical  Evil. — Jeicish  Idea 
of  Punitive  Justice. —  Christ's  Doctrine  on  the  Suhject. 

We  must  now  examine  Christ's  miracles  of  healing  in  their  moral 
aspects,  and  in  their  connexion  with  his  ministry  as  Redeemer.  If  it 
can  be  shown  that  all  those  disturbances  of  the  bodily  organism,  which 
we  call  diseases,  have  their  origin  in  Sin,  as  the  source  of  all  discord 
in  human  nature,  we  may  infer  that  there  is  a  close  connexion  between 
these  miracles  and  his  proper  calling  ;  and  that,  in  healing  the  diseases 
produced  by  sin,  by  means  of  his  influence  upon  the  essential  nature 
of  the  disturbed  organism,  he  displayed  himself  also  as  the  Redeemer 
from  sin.  In  many  cases,  also,  we  may  find  the  physical  and  the  moral 
cure  reciprocally  operating  upon  each  other. 

The  question  first  occurs,  In  what  relation  does  Christ  himself  place 
disease  to  sin  %  This  question  is  connected  with  the  broader  one,  In 
what  relation  to  sin  does  he  place  physical  evil  in  general  1  In  Luke, 
v.,  20,  and  John,  v.,  14,  he  seems  to  assign  a  special  connexion  between 
sin  and  certain  diseases  as  its  punishments ;  but  other  expressions  of 
his  appear  to  contradict  such  a  connexion.  To  solve  this  difficulty,  we 
must  not  only  distinguish  the  different  aims  of  these  several  expressions, 
but  also  discriminate  between  the  true  and  the  false  in  the  modes  of 
thinking  prevalent  among  the  Jews. 

The  doctrine  that  sin  is  guilt,  and  that  the  Divine  holiness  reveals 
itself  in  opposition  to  sin,  as  punitive  justice,  is  one  of  the  characteris- 
tics of  the  religion  of  the  Old  Testament  in  its  relations  to  the  various 
shapes  of  natural  religion.  Punitive  justice  displays  itself  in  the  es- 
tablished connexion  between  sin  and  evil,  in  consequence  of  which  the 
sinful  will  that  rebels  in  act  against  the  Divine  law  must  be  compelled, 
through  suffering,  actually  to  acknowledge  that  law,  and  to  humble  it- 
self before  its  majesty.  According  to  this  view  of  the  world,  which 
subordinates  the  natural  to  the  moral,  all  evil  is  to  be  attributed  to  sin  ; 
it  shows  itself  to  the  soul  estranged  from  God  as  belonging  to,  and 
connected  with  sin  ;  the  consciousness  that  sin  is  opposed  to  the  Divine 
order  of  nature  is  developed  by  sufferings ;  and  thus  sin  appears,  even 
to  the  sinner,  to  be  deserving  of  punishment.     All  history  proves  that 


144  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 

the  consequences  of  bad  actions,  as  well  as  of  good  ones,  operate  for 
generations;  all  history  testifies  that  "  God  is  a  jealous  God,  visiting 
the  iniquities  oj"  the  fathers  upon  the  children  to  the  third  and  fourth  gen- 
eration.^^ We  can  see  this  especially  in  the  crises  of  the  history  of  na- 
tions, by  tracing  them  to  their  preparatory  causes.  The  history  of  the 
Jewish  nation,  particularly,  was  designed  to  exhibit  this  universal  law 
in  miniature,  but  with  striking  distinctness. 

To  this  conception  of  the  punitive  justice  of  God,  as  displaying  itself 
in  the  progress  of  history  and  in  the  course  of  generations,  a  contracted 
Theodicy  had  joined  itself,  which  arrogantly  assumed  to  apply  the  uni- 
versal law  to  special  cases.*  The  book  of  Job  had  already  refuted 
this  contracted  view  ;  and  Christ  himself  opposed  it ;  taking,  however, 
the  basis  of  truth  which  was  found  in  the  Old  Testament,  purifying  it 
from  foreign  admixtures  of  error,  and  giving  it  a  fuller  developement.t 

The  doctrine  of  punitive  justice  was  in  no  degree  impugned  by  the 
new  and  lofty  prominence  which  Christ  gave  to  the  Redeeming  love  of 
God ;  on  the  contrary,  the  latter  doctrine  presupposed  the  former,  but 
at  the  same  time  gave  it  peculiar  modifications.  And  as  Christ  teaches 
us  that  all  human  events  are  subservient  to  the  manifestation  of  redeem- 
ing love,  the  highest  aim  of  God's  moral  government,  it  follows  that  the 
connexion  between  sin  and  physical  evil,  ordained  by  Divine  justice, 
must  serve  the  same  great  end.  The  universal  evil  introduced  by  sin 
is  go  distributed  in  detail  as  to  aid  in  preparing  the  soil  of  men's  hearts 
to  receive  and  appropriate  redemption  and  salvation,  and  in  further 
purifying  the  hearts  of  those  who  have  already  become  partakers  of 
the  Divine  life. 

There  are  two  passages  in  which  Christ  contradicts,  in  the  one  neg- 
atively and  in  the  other  positively,  the  contracted  view  of  punitive  jus- 
tice, before  referred  to. 

The  negative  contradiction  is  given  in  Luke,  xiii.,  2,  4  :  "  Suppose 
ye  that  these  Galileans  were  sinners  above  all  the  Galileans,  because  they 
suffered  such  things  7  I  tell  you,  nay  ;  but  except  ye  repent,  ye  shall  all 
likewise  perish.  Or  those  eighteen,  upon  whom  the  toioer  i?i  Siloamjell, 
and  sleio  them,  thinh  ye  that  they  were  sinners  ahore  all  men  that  dioelt 
in  Jerusalem  ?'"  In  this  passage  Christ  teaches  that  the  evil  that  befel 
the  individuals  did  not  necessarily  measure  their  individual  guilt,  but 
that  their  particular  sufferings  were  to  be  traced  back  to  the  general 
guilt  of  the  nation. 

*  The  fact  that  this  view  was  maintained  by  the  carnally-disposed,  and  tlint  the  later 
Jewish  histoi-y  often  apparently  reversed  the  connexion  between  sin  and  evil,  piety  and 
liappiness,  irave  rise,  subsequently,  to  an  Ebiouitish  reaction,  which  maintained  that  in 
this  world,  belonj^-ing  as  it  does  to  Satan,  the  wicked  have  possession  of  the  g(x)ds  of  this 
life,  while  [joverty  ajid  pain  must  be  the  lot  of  tlie  pious;  and  that  this  state  of  things  will 
only  be  compensated  in  the  Millciiniuni,  or  in  the  life  to  come.  Christ's  truth  opposes  both 
these  false  views.  *  Luke,  xiii.,  4. 


DEMONIACAL  POSSESSION.  145 

The  positive  contradiction  is  found  in  John,  ix.,  2,  3  :  "Master  who 
did  sin,  this  man  or  his  parents,  that  he  teas  horn  blind  ?  Jesus  an- 
swered, Neither  hath  this  man  sinned,  nor  his  parents ;  hut  that  the 
works  of  God  should  he  made  manifest  in  hiynT  Here  he  rebukes  tlie 
presupposition  that  the  calamity  of  tlie  individual  sufferer  was  to  be  re- 
fen-ed  to  sins  committed  by  his  ancestors,  and  brings  out,  in  stronty  con- 
trast with  it,  that  Almighty  love  which  shows  itself  even  by  so  distrib- 
uting physical  evil  as  to  train  men  for  salvation.* 

We  interpret,  in  accordance  with  this  view,  the  explanations  which 
Christ  gave  in  several  cases  of  a  relation  between  disease  and  sin,  and 
between  healing  and  the  pardon  of  sin.  He  referred  either  to  the  gen- 
eral connexion,  through  which  all  evil  was  intended  to  call  forth  the 
consciousness  of  sin ;  or  to  a  closer  connexion,  in  individual  cases,  be- 
tween a  given  misfortune  and  a  specific  sin.  The  relation  between  the 
bodily  cure  and  the  pardon  of  sin  was  still  closer.t 

II.  Demoniacal  Possession. 
The  connexion,  of  which  we  have  spoken,  between  sin  and  evil,  must 
be  especially  predicated  of  those  forms  of  disease  which,  view  them 
as  we  may,  exhibited  a  moral  wreck,  not  only  of  the  individual  suffer- 
ers, but  of  the  age  in  which  they  lived;  and  which  admitted  no  means 
of  perfect  cure  except  moral  influences.  We  mean  the  p)sychical  dis- 
eases, the  sufferings  of  the  so-called  Demoniacs. 

§  101.  Two  Theories  of  the  Affliction:  (a)  Possession  hy  Evil  Spirits  ; 
[h)  Insanity. — Analogous  Phenomena  in  other  Times. 
There  are  two  points  of  view,  opposed  to  each  other,  but  yet,  per- 
haps, admitting  of  an  intermediate  ground,  in  which  we  may  contem- 
plate these  forms  of  disease ;  they  may  have  originated  either  (o)  from 
internal  causes  in  the  soul  itself,  or  {h)  from  causes  entirely  outward 
and  supernatural.  Those  who  adopt  the  first  view  confine  their  atten- 
tion to  the  characteristic  symptoms  as  reported,  and  compare  them  with 
the  very  similar-  ailments,  the  diseases  of  the  mind  and  of  the  nervous 
system,  which  not  only  existed  in  that  age,  but  have  appeared  at  all 
subsequent  periods.|  Those  who  strictly  adopt  the  latter  view  adhere 
closely  to  the  letter  of  the  naiTative,  and  make  no  attempt  to  distinguish 
what  is  ohjcctive  in  it  from  what  is  subjective  ;  but  see  in  the  miserable 
demoTiiacs  only  passive  instruments  of  evil  spirits. 

If,  in  accordance  ^vith  this  view,  we  admit  no  intermediate  agency, 
but  ascribe  the  phenomena  immediately  to  evil  spirits,  the  cures  must 
be  directly  attributed  to  Christ's  dominion  over  the  powers  of  the  other 

*  We  shall  examine  tliis  explanation  again  in  its  proper  place  in  the  nan-ative. 

t  Matt.,  ix.,  2-5. 

X  Similar  disea.ses,  occun-ing  in  the  first  centuries,  were  explained  in  this  way  by  the 
physicians. — Orig.,  in  Matt.,  xiii.,  $  G. 


146  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 

world  ;  thus  strikingly  showing  his  supernatural  control  over  a  supernat- 
ural cause  of  disease.  And,  on  the  other  hand,  if  we  class  these  phe- 
nomena with  diseases  of  the  mind  in  general,  and  consider  the  sup- 
posed indwelling  of  evil  spirits  only  as  a  symptom  grounded  on  natu- 
ral causes,  we  shall  more  readily  be  able  to  conceive  how  a  disease 
arising  entirely,  oi-,  at  least,  chiefly  from  a  psychical  cause,  could  be 
cured  by  a  purely  psychical  agency.  Nor  would  this  in  the  least  degree 
deny,  or  even  detract  from,  the  miraculous  character  of  Christ's  acts  ;  for 
to  restore  a  raving  maniac  to  reason  by  a  look  or  a  word  was  surely  be- 
yond all  natural  psychological  influence,  and  presupposed  powers  tran- 
scending all  ordinary  agencies.  It  is  true,  we  find  analogous  cases  in 
later  times,  in  which  great  things  were  wrought  by  immediate  Divine 
impressions,  and  by  devout  prayer  in  the  name  of  Christ.* 

Not  only  at  the  time  of  Christ's  appearance,  but  also  in  the  centu- 
ries immediately  following,t  many  forms  of  disease  like  those  called 
demoniacal  in  the  New  Testament  were  spread  abroad ;  and  we  may 
infer  that  the  same  cause  was  at  work  in  both  periods. 

§  102.  Connexion  of  the  Phenomena  with  the  State  of  the  Times. —  Con- 
ceptions of  the  Jews  in  regard  to  them:  of  the  Demoniacs  themselves. 
The  diseases  of  the  mind  in  every  age  bear  the  stamp,  to  some  de- 
gree, of  the  prevailing  tendencies  and  ideas  of  the  times  ;  and  those  to 
which  we  refer  reflected  the  peculiar  and  predominant  features  of  the 
Jewish  mind  of  that  age.  The  wtetched  demoniacs  seemed  to  be  hur- 
ried onward  by  a  strange  and  hostile  power  that  subjugated  their  intel- 
lectual and  moral  being,  and  whose  chief  characteristic,  as  displayed  in 
their  paroxysms,  was  a  wild  and  savage  destructiveness.  The  Jews 
explained  these  phenomena  according  to  their  own  notions,  and  espe- 
cially by  the  general  opinion  that  man  was  surrounded  on  every  side 
by  the  operations  of  evil  spirits,  who  were  the  authors  of  both  moral 
and  physical  evil.|     And  as  a  fierce  destructiveness  was  considered  to 

*  We  mast  not  take  the  spirit  of  an  age  of  rantorialism  or  rationalism  as  a  rule  forjudg- 
ing of  all  phenomena  of  the  ^vx'h  which  veils  within  itself  the  Infinite ;  which  is  capable 
of  such  manifold  excitement;  and  whose  vaiious  powers  are  alternately  donuant  and  active 
— now  one  prevailing,  and  now  another.  An  age  may  be  destitute  of  certain  phenomena 
and  experiences,  because  it  has  no  organs  for  developing  them ;  and  this  would  prove  no- 
thing against  their  reality. 

Although  I  can  hardly  think  it  possible  tliat  die  view  given  in  the  text,  taken  in  connex- 
ion with  the  general  i)rinciples  of  this  book,  can  be  misunderstood,  yet,  in  order  to  guard 
against  a  possible  misinterpretation,  I  deem  it  best  to  add,  tliat  it  was  far  from  my  inten- 
tion to  do  away  with  the  distinction  between  tlie  natural  and  the  supernatural,  or  to  ti'ace 
the  latter  entirely  to  the  dcvelopemcnt  of  i)owers  inlicrent  in  the  4^Xn-  I  wished  only  to 
point  out  tlic  organ,  the  point  of  contact,  in  the  ^'''X'Ji  for  supernatural  communications  and 
influences;  to  show  that  it  is  itxelf  supematwrnl  in  its  hidden  essence,  which  looks  forward 
to  be  unfolded  hcrcnftcr  in  the  higher  world  to  which  it  is  allied. 

t  As  seen  in  tlie  Fathers,  and  in  Lucian's  I'hilopsendcs. 

i  Some  have  attributed  tlie  prevalence  of  this  opinion  to  an  admixture  of  Persian  reli- 


DEMONIACAL  POSSESSION.  147 

De  characteristic  of  these  spirits,  the  condition  of  the  demoniacs  was 
ascribed  to  their  being  possessed  by  one  or  more  of  them.* 

The  diseased  persons  themselves  invohmtarily  conceived  of  their  own 
experience  according  to  the  prevalent  opinion,  and  their  expressions, 
literally  taken,  contributed  to  confirm  it.  Every  thing  irrational  which 
suggested  itself  to  them  appeared  to  their  consciousness  as  the  work 
and  the  will  of  the  indwelling  evil  spirit.  They  conceived  themselves, 
in  fact,  as  possessed  of  two  natures,  viz.,  their  real  proper  being  (the 
true  I),  and  the  evil  spirit  which  subjugated  the  other;  and  thus  it  hap- 
pened that  they  spoke  in  the  person  of  the  evil  spirit,  with  which  they 
felt  themselves  blended  into  one,  even  in  instincts  and  propensities  ut- 
terly repugnant  to  their  true  nature.  The  sense  of  inward  discord 
and  distraction  might  rise  to  such  a  height  as  to  induce  the  belief  that 
they  were  possessed  by  a  number  of  spirits,  to  whom  they  were  com- 
pelled to  lend  their  utterance. 

We  may  find  a  reason  for  the  remarkable  prevalence  of  such  phe- 
nomena at  that  time,  not  only  among  the  Jews,  but  also  throughout  the 
Roman  Empire,  in  the  character  of  the  age  itself  It  was  an  age  of 
spiritual  and  physical  distress,  of  manifold  and  violent  disruptions ;  such 
as  characterize  those  critical  epochs  in  the  history  of  the  world  at 
which,  from  the  dissolution  of  all  existing  things,  a  new  creation  is 
about  to  unfold  itself.  The  sway  of  Demonism  was  a  sign  of  the  ap- 
proaching dissolution  of  the  Old  World.t  Its  phenomena — symptoms 
of  the  universally  felt  discord — were  among  the  signs  of  the  times 
which  pointed  to  the  comitig  of  the  Redeemer,  who  was  to  change  that 
discord  into  harmony.  The  insatiable  craving  of  want  is  always  a  pre' 
cursor  of  the  approaching  supply. 

§  103.  Accomviodation  of  the  two  extreme  Theories. 
If  now  the  question  be  asked  whether  these  phenomena  are  to  be  con- 
sidered as  wholly  natural  or  as  supernatural,  we  answer,  that  these  two 
extreme  views  may  be  more  or  less  abruptly  opposed  to  each  other.    On 

gious  doctrines  ;  but  it  had  a  far  deeper  ground  in  the  rehgious  spirit  of  the  age.  It  arose 
from  the  sense  of  dixcord  which  penetrated  the  whole  miud  of  that  time,  and  which  was 
reflected  in  the  doctrine  of  Dualism,  then  so  extensively  prevailing. 

*  We  agree  with  Strauss,  that,  according  to  the  Jewish  mode  of  thinking,  the  interfe. 
rence  of  evil  spirits  must  be  really  supposed,  and  that  the  views  of  Josephus  (B.  J.,  vii., 
fi,  3  :  Ta  yap  KoKointva  SaiftovtiiTrovrtpuiv  icmv  di'0/)w7ruv  TvcPfxara,  roii  <fiiaiv  zlafivoiitva)  were  mod* 
jfied  by  his  Greek  culture.  At  a  later  period,  when  Oriental  influences  were  more  felt,  the 
idea  of  demons,  as  spirits  allied  to  matter,  or  as  hypostatic  emanations  from  the  'ihi.  was 
common  even  among  the  educated  Hellenists. 

t  Schelling's  remark  on  this  subject,  in  his  "Philosophical  Inquiries  into  the  Nature  of 
Human  Freedom,"  is  worthy  of  note  :  "  The  time  is  coming  when  all  this  splendour  will  be 
dissolved ;  when  the  existing  body  of  this  fair  world  will  fall  to  pieces,  and  chaos  come 
again.  But  before  the  fijial  wreck,  the  aJl-pei-vading  powers  assume  the  nature  of  evil 
spirits  ;  the  very  powers  which  in  the  sounder  time  were  the  protecting  spirits  of  life,  be- 
come, as  dissolution  draws  on,  agents  of  mischief  and  destruction." 


148  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 

the  one  hand,  we  may  ascribe  the  origin  of  the  disease  to  natural  causes, 
and  judge  of  the  symptoms  accordingly,  without  excluding  the  opera- 
tion of  the  other  concealed  cause  ;  the  question  whether  such  a  cause 
existed  or  not  can  be  by  no  means  decided  merely  by  the  syrajitoms. 

Christ  teaches  that  all  wickedness,  and  all  evil  in  its  connexion  with 
wickedness,  must  be  traced  back  to  a  higher  cause — to  a  Spirit*  that 
fii-st  rebelled  against  God,  to  an  Original  Sin,  which  gave  birth  to  the 
first  germ  of  wickedness.  As  he  lays  down  a  certain  connexion  be- 
tween the  various  stages  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  so  he  assigns  a  simi- 

*  If  it  coalJ  be  proved  tliat  Christ  had  only  taken  up  the  doctrine  of  the  existence  of 
Satan  by  way  oi  formal  accoramodatiou  (p.  114),  the  question  of  the  demoniacs  would  be 
at  once  decided.  It  cannot  be  denied  that  in  many  of  his  expressions  we  might  substitute, 
for  Satan,  the  objective  notion  of  evil,  without  at  all  affecting  the  thought.  We  might,  in- 
deed, admit  that  he  used  the  doctrine  (boiTOwed  from  the  circle  of  popular  ideas)  merely  as 
a  figurative  covering  for  ei^il,  if  he  himself  had  any  where  intimated  that  he  did  not  intend 
thereby  to  confirm  the  view  of  the  origin  of  evil  which  the  popular  notion  involved ;  just  as 
we  showed  from  his  own  vords  that,  in  transferring  the  popular  figures  to  his  Messianic 
kingdom,  he  did  distinguish  between  the  substantial  truth  and  its  formal  covering.  But 
this  is  by  no  means  the  case  here.  There  is  not  a  vestige  of  evidence  in  his  conversations 
with  his  disciples  to  show  that  he  did  7iot  intend  to  establish  the  doctrine  that  a  higher  in- 
telligence, estranged  from  God,  icas  the  original  source  of  evil.  Neither  can  we  class  this 
question  (as  some  do)  among  those  which  have  no  bearing  on  the  interests  of  religion,  and 
which  Christ's  mission  did  not  require  him  to  interfere  with  ;  our  conception  of  evil  will 
be  veiy  different  if  we  confine  it  to  human  nature,  from  what  it  would  be,  if  we  admit  its 
existence  also  in  spirits  of  a  higher  order. 

In  John,  viii.,  44,  Christ  gives  a  perfectly  defined  conception  of  Satan  ;  he  designates  him 
as  "  the  Spirit  alienated  from  truth  and  goodness  (for,  according  to  John's  usage,  aXrjOeia  in- 
volves both  the  trne  and  the  good) ;  in  whom  falsehood  and  wickedness  have  become  a  sec- 
ond nature;  who  can  fiud  no  abiding-place  in  the  truth."  The  revelation  of  truth  which 
the  spirits  were  to  receive  from  communion  with  the  Father  of  Spirits  passes  by  him  un- 
heeded ;  he  cannot  receive  and  hold  it  fast,  because  he  has  no  organ  to  embrace  it,  no  sus- 
ceptibility for  its  impressions.  Christ  tells  the  Phaiisees  that  they,  serving  the  Spirit  of 
Lies,  and  living  in  communion  with  him,  showed  themselves,  by  the  spirit  which  their  ac- 
tions manifested,  to  be  children  of  Satan,  rather  than  of  Abraham  and  God.  Schleier- 
macher's  attempt  to  prove  (Works,  iii.,  §  45,  p.  214)  that  even  in  this  passage  the  idea  of 
a  personal  Satan  is  untenable,  is  by  no  means  successful.  "  This  passage,"  says  he,  "  can- 
not be  interpreted  throughout  on  the  theory  of  the  reality  of  the  devil,  without  either  oppo- 
sing the  devil  to  God  in  the  Manichfean  sense,  or  else  calling  Christ  the  Son  of  God  in  the 
same  extended  signification  in  which  the  Pharisees  ai*e  called  jS'otw  of  the  Devil."  The  ar- 
gument is  unsuccessful,  we  say,  because  the  proper  point  of  comparison  would  be,  Tiot  the 
sense  in  which  Christ  can  be  called  the  Son  of  God,  but  the  sense  in  which  pious  men 
could  be  so  called  ;  and  in  a  comparison  it  is  not  necessary  that  all  the  relations  should  be 
adequate,  but  only  those  which  are  common  to  the  point  of  comparison  itself. 

Nor  can  we  admit  that  Christ,  ui  makhig  use  of  the  cuiTcnt  doctrine  as  a  covering  for 
bis  own,  added  nothing  new  to  it.  It  is  true  that  he  made  no  disclosures  on  the  subject  to 
satisfy  the  speculative  curiosity  of  science,  but  here,  as  elsewhere,  made  his  communica- 
tions only  to  meet  practical  wants.  It  is,  however,  precisely  in  the  region  of  practical  re- 
ligion that  the  doctrine  of  the  personality  of  Satan  was  newly  modiKed  by  its  connexion 
with  the  doctrine  of  Jesus,  as  the  author  of  salvation.  As  for  the  passages  in  which  "  evil" 
mi'-rht  be  substiliited  for  "Satan,"  it  is  enough  to  say,  that  after  the  existence  of  such  an 
intelligence,  the  first  rebel  against  God,  liad  been  given  as  a  fact,  it  was  natural  to  em|doy 
him  as  the  representative  of  evil  in  general.  We  may  use  "  Satan"  as  a  symbol  for  wick- 
edness in  general,  without  implying  any  thing  against  the  doctrine  of  his  personal  cxist- 
eace.    See  p.  74. 


DExAIONIACAL  POSSESSION.  149 

lar  connexion  between  all  the  manifestations  of  the  powers  of  evil.  It 
is  thus,  in  perfect  accordance  with  the  teaching  of  Christ,  that  we  as- 
cribe those  fearful  disturbances  of  the  corporeal,  spiritual  organism  (in 
which  the  might  of  the  principle  of  sin  in  human  nature  and  the  moral 
degeneracy  of  that  nature  are  so  strikingly  exhibited),  to  the  general 
kingdom  of  the  Evil  One. 

On  the  other  hand,  in  admitting  the  higher  and  concealed  cause,  we 
need  not  necessarily  conceive  it  as  operating  in  a  magical  way,  without 
any  preparation.  A  preparation,  a  point  of  contact  in  the  pyschologi- 
cal  developement,  is  by  no  means  excluded  by  such  an  admission,  but, 
as  is  the  case  in  all  influences  wi-ought  upon  man's  inner  nature,  rather 
presupposed.  In  every  instance  we  both  can  and  ought  to  distinguish 
tlie  symptoms  of  these  diseases  (as  stated  in  the  narrative)  which  arose 
from  the  hidden  cause,  from  those  which  might  have  originated  in  the 
current  opinions  of  the  times,  or  in  the  peculiar  psychological  condition 
of  the  sufferers  themselves.  In  either  case  we  shall  have  to  ascribe 
the  radical  cure,  which  Christ  alone  could  accomplish,  to  the  operation 
of  his  Spirit  upon  the  evil  principle  in  the  man  himself. 

§  104.   Christ^s  Explanations  of  Demonism  furely  Spiritual. — His 
Accommodation  to  the  Conceptions  of  the  Demoniacs. 

It  is  important  to  inquire  whether  Christ  assigned,  in  express  words, 
any  definite  view  of  the  origin  of  these  diseases,  or  established  any 
view  by  taking  it  as  a  point  of  departure.  That  he  did  not  dispute  the 
current  opinion,  does  not  prove  that  he  participated  in  it;  this  would 
have  been  one  of  those  errors,  not  affecting  the  interests  of  religion, 
which  his  mission  did  not  require  him  to  correct.  Apart  from  its  moral 
ground,  it  belongs  to  the  domain  of  science,  which  is  left  to  its  own  in- 
dependent developement — to  natural  philosophy,  psychology,  or  medi- 
cine ;  sciences  entirely  foreign  to  the  sphere  of  Christ's  immediate  call- 
ing as  a  teacher,  although  they  might  derive  fruitful  germs  of  truth  from 
it.  It  was  his  peculiar  office  only  to  reveal  to  men  the  moral  ground 
of  both  general  and  special  evil,  and  thus  to  convince  them  that  its 
thorough  cure  could  be  effected  only  by  influences  wrought  upon  the 
principle  of  moral  corruption  in  which  it  originated.  In  order  to 
this,  the  doctrine  that  these  diseases  were  caused  by  indwelling  evil 
spirits  could  be  made  use  of  as  a  point  of  departure,  especially  as  the 
truth  of  the  idea  of  a  kingdom  of  Satan,  in  its  moral  sense,  was  pre- 
supposed. 

In  regard  to  Christ's  accommodation  to  the  conceptions  which  the 
demoniacs  themselves  had  of  their  own  condition,  our  remarks  in  an- 
other place  (p.  114)  in  refei-ence  to  the  distinction  between^r/««Z  and 
material  accommodation  are  not  fully  applicable.     The  law  of  veracity, 


150  THE  MIRACLES  QF  CHRIST. 

in  the  intercourse  of  beings  in  possession  of  reason,  does  not  hold  good 
where  the  essential  conditions  of  rational  intercourse  are  done  away. 
In  such  cases,  language  obeys  its  natural  laws  only  in  proportion  as  the 
use  of  reason  itself  is  re-established. 

There  lay  a  profound  truth  at  the  bottom  of  the  demoniac's  con- 
sciousness that  his  feelings,  inclinations,  and  woi'ds  did  not  spring  from 
his  rational,  God-allied  nature  (his  true  I),  but  from  a  foreign  power 
belonging  to  the  kingdom  of  the  devil,  which  had  subjugated  the  for- 
mer. And  this  truth  offered  the  necessary  point  of  contact  for  the 
operation  of  Christ's  spiritual  influence  to  aid  the  soul,  which  longed  to 
be  delivered  from  its  distraction  and  freed  from  its  ignominious  bond- 
age. In  the  mind  of  the  demoniac,  the  fundamental  truth  was  insep- 
arable from  the  Jbiyfi  in  which  he  conceived  it ;  it  was,  therefore,  ne- 
cessary to  seize  upon  the  latter,  in  oi'der  to  develope  the  former. 

§  105.  Difference  hctween  Christ's  Healing  of  the  Demoniacs  and 
the  Operations  of  the  Jewish  Exorcists. 

The  so-called  Exorcists  were  at  that  time  practising  among  the  Jews 
their  pretended  art  of  expelling  demons  ;  an  art  which  they  affected  to 
derive  from  Solomon.*  The  means  which  they  employed  were  cer- 
tain herbs,  fumigations,  and  forms  of  conjuration.  They  probably  pos- 
sessed a  dexterous  legerdemain,  and  perhaps  by  natural  agencies,  aided 
by  the  imagination,  could  produce  powerful  effects  for  the  moment,  the 
cases  of  obvious  failure  being  forgotten  in  those  of  apparent  success. 
Had  Christ  produced  only  similar  effects,  their  very  commonness  would 
have  made  them  unimpressive.  The  moral  and  spiritual  influences  of 
Christ,  proceeding  from  his  immediate  Divine  power,  were  of  a  totally 
different  character  from  these  juggling  tricks. 

An  excellent  illustration  of  this  is  afforded  in  the  account  of  the  cure 
of  the  deaf  and  dumb  demoniac,  in  Luke,  xi.,  14  ;  Matt.,  xii.,  22.  Even 
the  most  hostile  Phai-isees  could  not  deny  that  in  this  instance  some- 
thing was  done  which  could  not  be  explained  by  natural  causes ;  and 
to  obviate  the  impression  which  it  made  upon  the  multitude,  and  to 
prevent  them  from  acknowledging  the  Divinity  of  Christ,  they  accused 
him,  contrary  to  their  own  convictions,  of  being  in  league  with  the  ru- 
ler of  evil  spirits,  and  of  working  his  wonders  by  powers  derived  from 
that  dark  source.  Christ  points  out  the  contradiction  involved  in  their 
assertion,  and  showed  that  such  works  could  be  wrought  only  by  the 
power  of  God,  which  alone  could  free  the  human  soul  from  the  domin- 
ion of  the  evil  6])irit.      He  designates  this  individual  case  as  a  sign 

*  Joseph.,  Archacol.,  viii.,  i2,  §  5.  Joseplius  appeals  to  a  remarkable  proof  of  this  fact. 
\yhich  one  of  these  exorcists  had  given  before  Vespasian  in  presence  of  i)art  of  the  Ro- 
man army.  See  the  Greek  Testament  of  Solomon  (written  at  a  later  period)  in  Dr.  Fleck's 
"  Theolofjische  KeisefrucUte,"  iii.,  113. 


THE  RAISING  OF  THE  DEAD.  151 

that  the  kingdom  of  God,  before  which  the  powers  of  darkness  must 
flee  away,  had  manifested  itself.  He  gives  them  to  understand  thai 
the  original  source  of  evil  in  mankind  and  in  men  had  first  to  be  re 
moved,  before  its  particular  effects  could  be  subdued.  And  from  this  it 
necessarily  followed  (he  showed)  that  every  casting  out  of  evil  spirits, 
every  healing  of  demoniacs,  which  was  not  founded  upon  a  victory 
over  the  original  evil  power,  was  only  an  apparent  exorcism,  and  must 
be  followed  by  a  worse  reaction.  Thus  the  ordinary  exorcists,  who  ap- 
parently produced  the  same  effects  as  Christ,  in  reality  did  the  very  op- 
posite.    The  evil  was  banished  only  to  return  with  increased  power. 

He  that  does  not  work  in  communion  vdth  Christ,  and  by  the  power 
of  the  same  Spirit,  will,  in  producing  effects  apparently  the  same,  bring 
about  totally  different  results.  He  advances  the  kingdom  of  the  devil, 
and  not  the  kingdom  of  God. 

The  case  of  the  Gadarene*  who  was  restored  from  raving  madness 
to  a  sound  mind  by  the  Divine  power  of  Christ,  and  who  was  so  drawn 
to  the  Saviour  that  he  wished  to  remain  always  with  him,  shows  that 
the  radical  cure  of  the  demoniacs  consisted  in  this,  that  they  who  were 
freed  from  the  evil  spirit  were  drawn  to  the  Spirit  of  God  which  had 
delivered  them.  Such  a  condition  was  perhaps  to  many  the  crisis  of 
a  higher  life.  In  this  way  Mary  Magdalene  appears  to  have  been 
brought  into  the  narrower  circle  of  Christ's  disciples.t 

The  silence  of  John's  Gospel  in  regard  to  Christ's  healing  of  demo- 
niacs may  be  ascribed  to  the  fact  that  the  disease  was  more  common 
in  Galilee  than  in  Jei'usalem. 

III.    The    Raising   of  the   Dead. 
§  106.  Different  Views  on  these  Miracles. 

The  position  to  be  assigned  to  the  miracle  of  the  raising  of  the  dead 
will  depend  upon  the  view  which  we  take  of  the  real  condition  of  those 
said  to  be  raised.  Some  suppose  that  they  were  not  absolutely  dead  in 
the  physiological  sense,  but  that  there  was  an  intermission  of  the  pow- 
ers of  life,  presenting  symptoms  resembling  death ;  and  those  who 
adopt  this  view  of  the  case  consider  the  miracle  to  differ  only  in  de- 
gree from  that  of  healing  the  sick. 

But  if  the  accounts  are  taken  literally,  and  we  suppose  a  real  death, 
the  miracle  was  specificalhj  different  from  that  of  healing,  and,  in  fact, 
constituted  the  very  culminating  point  of  supernatural  agency.  Yet, 
even  to  awaken  the  dormant  powers  of  life,  and  kindle  up  again  the 
expiring  flame,  would  certainly  have  been  a  miracle,  demanding  for 
its  accomplishment  a  Divine  power  in  Christ. 

A  precise  account  of  the  symptoms,  and  a  knowledge  of  physiology, 

*  Mark,  v.,  1.     Luke,  viii.,  26.  t  Mark,  xvi.,  9. 


152  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 

would  be  necessary  to  give  us  the  elements  for  a  decision  of  this  ques- 
tion, in  the  absence  of  any  testimony  from  Christ's  own  mouth  to  de- 
cide it.  In  regard  to  Chi'ist's  own  words,  it  is  a  fair  question  whether 
he  meant  to  distinguish  closely  between  apparent  and  real  death,  or 
whether  he  made  use  of  the  term  "  death"  only  in  accordance  with  the 
popular  usage. 

If  it  be  presupposed  that  the  dead  were  restored  to  earthly  life  after 
having  entered  into  another  form  of  existence — into  connexion  with 
another  world — the  idea  of  resurrection  would  be  dismal ;  but  we 
have  no  right  to  form  such  a  presupposition  in  our  blank  ignorance  of 
the  laws  under  which  the  new  form  of  consciousness  developes  itself 
in  the  soul  after  separation  from  the  body.* 

B.  CHRIST'S  MIRACLES  WROUGHT  UPON  MATERIAL  NATURE. 
§  107.  Tliese  exldhit  Supernatural  Pmver  most  obviously. 

We  pass  now  to  a  consideration  of  the  miracles  which  Christ 
wrought  upon  material  nature,  in  which  the  supernatural  exhibits  it- 
self in  the  highest  possible  degree,  as  an  intermediate  psychical  agency 
is,  by  the  veiy  nature  of  the  case,  excluded. 

Apart  from  individual  cases,  it  is  certain  that  a  power  of  controlling 
nature  is  one  of  the  marked  features  of  the  image  of  Christ  given  to 
us  in  the  evangelical  tradition.  He  had  fully  impressed  men's  minds 
with  a  belief  of  this.  And  in  deciding  upon  the  individual  cases  them- 
selves, every  thing  depends  upon  the  conception  of  Christ's  character  as 
a  whole,  with  which  we  set  out.  Were  such  a  narrative  of  the  acts  of 
an  ordinary  man  handed  down  to  us,  even  though  we  might  be  unable 
to  separate  the  actual  course  of  fact  from  the  subjective  dress  given  to 
it  in  the  account,  we  should  yet  be  inclined  to  suppose  that  the  man 
had  wrought  some  mighty  influences  upon  the  minds  of  his  contempo- 
raries, and  that  they  had  involuntarily  transferred  these  to  nature,  which 
is  so  often  made  the  mirror  of  what  passes  in  the  mind  of  man. 

But  if  we  set  out  in  our  investigation  of  the  Gospel  narrative  with 
a  just  idea  of  the  specific  difference  between  Christ  and  any,  even  the 
greatest,  of  mere  men  ;  if  we  set  out  with  a  full  intuition  of  the  God- 
Man,  we  shall  find  no  difficulty  whatever  in  believing  that  he  operated 
upon  the  most  secret  powers  of  nature  as  no  other  could  have  done, 
and,  by  the  might  of  his  Divinity,  controlled  nature  in  a  way  which 
finds  no  parallel  among  men. 

*  See  hereafter  on  the  resurrection  of  the  "Widow's  Sou,"  and  of  "Lazarus." 


BOOK    V. 


THE  PUBLIC  MINISTRY  OF  CHRIST 

ACCORDING    TO    ITS 

CHRONOLOGICAL  CONNEXION. 


PART  I.  FROM  THE  COMMENCEMENT  OF  HIS  MINISTRY  TO  THE 
TRIUMPHAL  ENTRY. 

PART  II.  FROM  THE  TRIUMPHAL  ENTRY  TO  THE  ASCENSION. 


BOOK  V. 

THE  PUBLIC  MEVISTBY  OF  CHRIST  ACCORDING  TO  ITS  CHRONOLOGICAL 

CONNEXION. 

INTRODUCTION. 

ON  THE  DIFFERENCES  BETWEEN  THE  SYNOPTICAL 
GOSPELS  AND  JOHN. 


IN  comparing  the  first  three  Gospels  with  John,  we  find  several  dis- 
crepancies in  regard  both  to  the  chronology  of  the  narrative  and 
to  the  theatre  of  Christ's  labours. 

§  108.  Differences  of  Chronology. 

Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke  include  but  one  feast  of  the  Passover 
within  the  period  of  Christ's  public  ministry,  while  John's  naiTative 
embraces  three  or  four.  It  may  be  enough  to  say  in  regard  to  this, 
that  the  former  Gospels  do  not  confine  themselves  to  a  chronological 
arrangement,  and  therefore  we  are  entitled  to  draw  no  conclusion  from 
the  fact  that  the  Passover  is  mentioned  in  them  but  once,  and  that  to- 
wards the  close  of  Christ's  career  upon  earth.  The  facts  narrated  may 
have  extended  through  several  years,  and  yet  the  mention  of  the  Pass- 
over feasts  may  have  been  omitted,  as  other  chronological  marks  have 
been. 

There  is  nothing  in  the  first  three  Gospels  to  contradict  the  theory 
that  Christ's  ministry  lasted  for  several  years.  Even  in  Luke  himself* 
there  is  a  passing  remark  which  necessarily  presupposes  the  occurrence 
of  one  Passover  in  the  midst  of  that  ministry.  There  is  nothing,  then, 
to  invalidate  John's  account,  which  mentions  the  occui'rence  of  several 

§  109.  Differences  as  to  the  Theatre  of  Christ's  Labours. 

According  to  the  synoptical  Gospels,  Galilee  was  the  chief  theatre 
of  Christ's  labours,  and  he  only  transferred  them  to  Jerusalem  when 
he  was  going  to  meet  his  approaching  death. 

We  must  here  more  minutely  examine    he  question  before  lightly 

*  Luke,  vi.,  1 :  the  aa66arov  ocvTcpdirpmrov,  in  connexion     i  b  the  "ripe  ears  of  com." 


156  THEATRE  OF  CHRIST'S  LABOURS. 

touched  upon  (p.  99),  Did  Christ  purposely  confine  his  labours 
chiefly  to  Galilee  in  hope  of  finding  more  ready  access  to  the  hearts 
of  its  simpler-minded  inhabitants,  who  were  less  in  bondage  to  the 
traditions  of  the  Pharisees  than  the  people  of  Jerusalem  1  or  was  it 
because  he  was  less  exposed  there  to  the  "  snares"  of  the  Pharisees, 
and  could,  therefore,  hope  to  exercise  his  labours  more  uninterruptedly, 
and  for  a  longer  period  ?  Did  he  wait  until  he  had  laid  the  foundation 
of  his  work  so  firmly  that  it  would  endure,  and  propagate  itself  after 
his  death,  before  he  determined  to  go  and  meet  the  perils  that  awaited 
him  at  the  seat  of  the  priesthood  ]  Did  he  only  make  up  his  mind 
to  go,  in  spite  of  the  dangers  which  he  foresaw  would  environ  him,  in 
order  to  avoid  the  re})roach  of  distrusting  the  Divinity  of  his  own 
cause,  and  thereby  giving  occasion  of  perplexity  to  his  disciples  1 

If  these  questions  are  answered  in  the  affirmative,  we  should  have 
to  suppose  that  the  tradition  which  John  followed' in  his  Gospel  did 
not  give  correctly  the  original  relations  of  Christ's  labours.  It  was 
utterly  inconsistent  with  a  wish  on  his  part  to  be  recognized  as  Mes- 
siah, for  him  to  conceal  himself  so  long  in  a  corner  of  Galilee,  and  to 
hold  back,  for  so  long  a  time,  his  testimony  to  his  Divine  calling  before 
the  face  of  the  people  and  the  priests  at  Jerusalem.  It  would  have 
been  a  stumbling-block,  indeed,  for  one  who  professed  to  acknowledge 
the  old  Mosaic  religious  ideas  in  all  their  holiness,  to  refrain,  durinfr 
the  whole  course  of  his  public  labours,  from  visiting  the  Temple  at 
one  of  the  chief  feasts  of  the  Jews. 

§  110.  V roof  that  Christ  frcquaithj  exercised  his  Ministnj  in 
Judca  and  Jerusalem. 
It  is  every  way  accordant,  indeed,  with  internal  probability,  that  Je- 
sus should  have  expected  to  find  easier  access  to  the  simple-minded 
Galilean  peasants  than  to  the  rich,  the  haughty,  and  the  learned  at  Je- 
rusalem, But  it  is  altogether  improbable  to  suppose  that  he  would 
subject  himself  to  the  reproach  of  despising  the  ancient  and  holy  insti- 
tutions* of  the  Jews,  by  absenting  himself  from  the  gatherings  of  the 
devout  at  their  chief  feasts  ;f  and  it  would  have  been  strange  if  he  had 
neglected  the  opportunity  of  extending  his  labours  that  was  afforded  by 

*  In  the  Talmndieal  treatise  "  Chagigak,"  c.  ii.,  none  (among  adults)  but  the  deaf,  tlie 
sick,  the  insane,  and  the  very  aged,  are  exempted  from  the  obhgatiou  to  attend  the  princi- 
pal feasts  at  Jerusalem.  Of  course,  this  law  could  not  apply  to  the  Jews  of  distant  coun- 
tries, who  were  only  required  to  send  annually  a  deputation  to  the  Temple,  with  sacrifices, 
and  with  the  money  arising  from  the  price  of  the  first  fruits.  Conf.  Philo,  Legat.  ad  Ca- 
jum,  $§  23.  31. 

t  Luke,  ii.,  41,  shows  that  the  devout  of  Galilee  felt  themselves  bound  to  journey  to  Je- 
rasalcm  at  least  at  the  Passover ;  the  passage  even  speaks  of  the  journey  of  a  woman,  on 
■vrhom  the  law  impoced  no  such  obligation.  We  cannot  (with  Slrauss)  find  any  proof  even 
in  Matthew  that  absence  from  the  festivals  was  held  of  no  account  among  the  Jewish- 
Chri-stians. 


JERUSALEM.  157 

the  general  coming  together  of  Jews  from  all  countries  at  those  festi- 
vals. 

And  how  unwise  would  it  have  been  in  him  to  defer  the  commence- 
ment of  his  labours  iu  the  Theocratic  capital  until  the  precise  period 
when  his  ministry  in  Galilee  must  have  drawn  upon  him  the  hatred  and 
the  fears  of  the  prevailing  Pharisaic  party  of  Jerusalem,  when  he  must 
have  foreseen,  too,  that  he  would  be  overcome  by  them ! 

As  to  his  putting  off  his  journey  to  Jerusalem  until  the  Apostles  were 
sufficiently  jorepared  to  carry  on  the  work  without  bis  personal  pres- 
ence, surely  the  Apostles  knew  as  yet  too  little  of  his  doctrines  to  ren- 
der such  a  course  consistent  even  with  human  foresight. 

Moreover,  the  fanatical  hatred  of  Christ  which  was  manifested  by 
the  Pharisaical  party  can  only  be  explained  upon  the  ground  that  he 
had  excited  their  opposition  by  a  previous  ministry,  of  some  duration, 
in  the  city  of  Jerusalem  itself.  Nor  are  there  wanting,  even  in  the 
first  three  Gospels,  intimations  to  the  same  effect,  e.  g.,  Matt.,  iv.,  25  ; 
XV.,  1,  in  which  the  sciibes  and  Pharisees  of  Jenisalcm  are  spoken  of 
as  o^atherino^  round  Jesus  in  Galilee  and  asking^  him  entanMinor  nues- 
tions.  It  may  have  been  the  case,  either  that,  after  his  labours  in  Jeru- 
salem had  drawn  their  hatred  upon  him,  they  followed,  and  watched 
him  suspiciously,  even  in  Galilee ;  or  that  some  of  the  events  that  0T"i- 
ginally  happened  in  the  city  were,  in  the  course  of  tradition,  intermin- 
gled and  confused  with  tliose  which  occurred  in  Galilee.  Again,  the 
earnest  exclamation  of  Christ,  recorded  in  Luke,  xiii.,  34  ;  Matt.,  xxiii., 
37,  distinctly  implies  that  he  had  often  endeavoured,  hy  7iis  personal 
teacMng  in  Jerusalem^  to  rouse  the  people  to  repentance  and  conver- 
sion, that  they  might  be  saved  from  the  ruin  then  impending  over  them. 
The  words,  "children  of  Jerusalem^''  although  they  might  apply  to  the 
whole  nation,  must,  in  this  exclamation,  which  is  specifically  addressed 
to  the  "  city  lohich  hilled  tlie  ^irophets^''  be  taken  as  referring  directly  to 
the  inhabitants  of  that  city. 

The  account  of  Christ's  relations  with  the  family  of  Lazarus,  given 
in  Luke  (x.,  38-42),  coincides  in  spirit  with  John's  statement  (xi.,  5) 
of  the  intimate  affection  with  which  the  Saviour  regarded  them  ;  and 
the  intimacy  must  have  been  formed  during  a  prolonged  stay  in  Jeru- 
salem. The  fact,  too,  that  several  distinguished,  men  of  that  city  {e.  g., 
Josepb  of  Aiimathea,  as  we  are  told  by  the  first  Evangelists)  had  at- 
tached themselves  to  Christ,  affVirds  us  the  same  conclusion.  Nor  can 
we  fail  to  trace,  in  Luke's  account  (ix.,  51-62)  of  his  last  journey  t(5 
Jerusalem,  some  confusion,  arising  from  a  blending  together,  in  the  nai'- 
rative,  of  events  that  had  occuiTed  on  a  former  journey. 

And,  again,  can  it  be  imagined  that  Christ  omitted  to  make  use  of  his 
miraculous  powers*  inecisely  in  Jerusalem,  where  the  best  opportunities 

*  This  difficulty,  indeed,  is  avoided  in  Matthew's  Gospel,  for  it  is  there  stated  (xxi.,  14), 


158  THEATRE  OF  CHRIST'S  LABOURS. 

of  employing  them  for  the  relief  of  human  suffering  would  have  been 
atfortled?"  Would  there  not,  moreover,  have  been  some  trace  of  this 
in  the  mode  of  his  reception  at  Jerusalem,  similar,  probably,  to  what 
occurred  on  his  first  labours  at  Nazareth?  Would  not  his  labours 
there  have  been  very  different  from  what  the  synoptical  Gospels  report 
them,  if  they  had  been  his  first  efforts  in  the  city  1 

Thus  there  are  many  things  in  the  first  three  Gospels  themselves 
which  indicate  and  presuppose  the  accuracy  of  John's  narrative.  The 
latter  is,  besides,  entirely  consistent  with  itself,  both  in  its  chronology, 
and  in  its  accounts  of  the  several  journeys  of  Christ  to  the  Feasts. 

Finally,  those  who  infer  from  the  synoptical  Gospels  that  Christ 
made  but  one  journey,  must  ascribe  to  the  author  of  John's  Gospel  a 
fabrication,  wilfully  invented,  to  serve  his  oviti  purpose.  But  the  man 
who  could  do  this  could  never  have  written  such  a  Gospel.  Moreover, 
were  it  a  fiction,  still,  if  intended  to  be  believed,  it  would  have  been 
more  accommodated  to  the  popular  tradition.  No  one  individual  could 
have  remodelled  the  entire  tradition  after  an  invented  plan  of  his  own, 
contradicting  all  others. 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  by  following  John,  we  do  not  charge  any 
falsification  upon  the  three  other  Evangelists  :  we  can  easily  conceive 
haw  the  separate  traditions,  of  which  those  Gospels  were  made  up, 
may  have  been  so  put  together,  without  any  intention  to  deceive,  as 
apparently  to  represent  Christ  as  making  one  Passover  journey.  From 
the  account  of  the  appearances  of  Christ  after  the  resurrection  given 
by  Matthew,  we  may  see  how  easily  such  obscurities  crept  into  the 
circle  of  Galilean  traditions.  Luke  agrees  with  John  in  assigning 
.Jerusalem  as  the  scene  of  those  appearances  ;  yet,  from  reading  IVLit- 
thew  alone,  we  might  infer  that  they  all  took  place  in  Galilee.* 

(jiiite  indefinitely,  however,  that  "  he  healed  the  lame  and  the  blind  in  the  Temple."  It  is 
impossible  not  to  see  that  the  historical  connexion  is  lost  in  this  passage  of  MaUhew  ;  we 
can  gather  it  correctly  only  from  John's  Gospel. 

'*  A  favourable  light  is  thrown  upon  the  genuineness  and  credibility  of  John's  Gospel  by 
the  fact  that  it  alone  contains  a  closely  connected  and  chronological  account  of  Christ's 
public  ministi-y. 


PART   I. 

FROM  THE  COMMENCEMENT  OF  CHRIST'S  PUBLIC  MINIS- 
TRY TO  THE  TRIUMPHAL  ENTRY. 


CHAPTER  L 

JESUS  AND  JOHN  THE  BAPTIST.— THE  FIRST  DISCIPLES. 

"^^TE  resume  the  thread  of  our  historical  narrative  at  the  point 

*  *    where  it  was  broken  off.* 

On  issuing  from  the  solitude  in  which  he  had  prepared  himself  for 
his  public  labours,  Jesus  again  sought  the  prophetic  man  who  had  given 
him  the  Divine  signal  for  their  commencement,  and  had  consecrated 
him  to  his  holy  calling.  Not,  indeed,  in  order  to  form  a  close  connex- 
ion with  him,  for  John  had  to  remain  true  to  his  office  as  Forerunner, 
and  to  continue  his  ministry  in  that  capacity,  until  the  Messiah  should 
lay  the  foundatitjn  of  his  visible  kingdom  with  miraculous  power,  and, 
by  securing  general  acknowledgment,  should  indicate  to  the  Forerun- 
ner, also,  that  he  should  submit  himself,  with  all  others,  to  the  Theo- 
cratic King.  But  in  the  circle  of  Galilean  disciples  that  had  gathered 
around  John,  full  of  longing  aspirations,  Jesus  might  expect  to  find 
some  suitable  to  be  taken  into  fellowship  with  himself  and  trained  to 
become  his  organs.  The  sphere  of  John's  ministry  was  calculated  to 
offer  the  best  point  of  transition  to  Christ's  independent  labours. 

§  111.  jSIessage  of  the  Sanhedrivi  to  John  at  Bcthahara. 

Meanwhile  John,  with  his  disciples,  had  been  traversing  both  shores 
of  the  Jordan ;  and  just  at  that  time  he  was  on  the  east  side  of  the 
river,  in  Perea,  at  Bethany,  or  Bethabara.t  The  Jewish  Sanhedrim, 
the  highest  ecclesiastical  authority,  had  at  first  quietly  suffered  him  to 
go  on  preaching  repentance.  But  when  his  followers  and  influence  in- 
creased to  such  an  extent  that  men  were  even  inclined  to  look  upon 
him  as  the  Messiah,  that  high  tribunal  thought  it  best  to  send  a  deputa- 
tion! to  obtain  from  his  own  lips  an  explanation  of  the  calling  in  which 
he  laboured. 

John  did  not  at  once  give  as  positive  a  statement  as  was  desired,  but 

*  Page  69. 

t  Two  different  names  given  to  the  same  place  at  different  times,  both  having  the  same 
meaning,  "  a  place  of  ships,"  "  a  place  for  crossing  in  ships"  (a  fen-y).     See  Liicke  on  John, 
'"■   Winers  "Bil)lisches  Reahvorterbuch,"  i.,  196,  2d  ed.  {  John,  i.,  19,  seq. 


160  JESUS  AND  JOHN  THE  BAPTIST. 

satisfied  himself  with  giving  a  negative  to  the  popular  idea  which  had 
probably  caused  the  deputation  to  be  sent  ["■  I  am  not  the  Christ^']. 
But  as  he  accompanied  this  denial  with  no  further  explanation  in  re- 
gard to  himself,  the  messengers  were  compelled  to  press  him  with  fur- 
ther questions.  They  naturally  aslced  him,  then,  whether  he  wished  to 
be  considered  as  one  of  the  great  personages  who  were  looked  for  as 
precursors  of  Messiah;  presupposing  that  only  in  this  sense  he  could 
assume  a  Divine  calling  to  baptize.  John  continued  to  give  curt  re- 
plies, just  enough  to  meet  each  separate  question.  Although  in  a 
spiritual  sense  he  was  the  Elias  who  was  to  precede  Messiah,  he  de- 
nied that  he  was  so  (i.  c,  in  the  carnal  sense  in  which  they  put  the 
question  and  would  understand  the  answer).  He  described  himself 
only  in  general  terms,  not  liable  to  perversion,  as  the  one  through  whom 
the  voice  of  God  called  upon  the  nation  to  repent  and  prepare  for  a 
new  and  glorious  revelation  that  was  at  hand.  Humbling  himself,  as 
the  bearer  merely  of  a  prefigurative  baptism,  he  pointed  to  the  might- 
ier One  who  should  baptize  with  the  Spirit,  who  already  stood,  unrec- 
ognized, in  their  midst.  His  remark,  "  ye  know  him  not,"  was  doubt- 
less founded  upon  the  fact  (which  he  did  not  utter)  that  he  knew  him, 
as  he  had  before  been  revealed  at  his  baptism. 

These  answers  to  the  deputation  are  less  clear  and  full  than  those 
which  the  Baptist  gave  for  the  warning  and  instruction  of  individuals, 
as  recorded  in  the  first  Gosjiels.  As  the  ruling  powers  had  little  fa- 
vour for  John,  he  had  good  reason  to  susjiect  the  intentions  with  which 
the  Sanhedrim  had  sent  their  messengers.  Hence  the  brevity  and  re- 
serve with  which  he  answered  them. 

§  112.  John  points  to  Jesus  as  the  Svjfeiing  Messiah,  and  testifies  to  his 
Higher  Dignity. 

On  the  day  after  John  had  thus  (officially,  as  it  were)  pohited  Christ 
out  as  having  already  appeared  among  the  people,  though  unrecognized 
by  them,  the  Saviour  came  forth  ftom  his  seclusion,  and  showed  him- 
self in  the  midst  of  John's  disciples.*  The  Baptist,  beholding  his 
approach,  exclaimed,  ^'Behold  the  Lamh  of  God,  that  tahcth  away  the 
sin  of  the  worlds  The  image  of  the  Holy  One,  suffering  for  his  peo- 
ple, and  bearing  their  sins  (Isa.,  liii.),  stood  before  his  soul  as  he  uttered 
these  words.  As  we  have  already  seen,  John  believed  that  the  Mes- 
siah would  have  to  go  through  a  struggle  with  the  corrupt  pait  of  the 
people  ;  andiie  readily  joined  to  this  belief  the  idea  of  a  Messiah  sif- 
fering  for  the  sins  of  the  people,  and  triumphing  through  suffering. 
The  intuition  to  which  he  gave  utterance  was  simultaneous  with  the 
appearance  before  his  eyes  of  Christ's  person,  so  gentle,  so  calm,  and 

'  John,  i.,  29. 


THE  BAPTIST  POINTS  OUT  CHRIST.  161 

so  meek;*  and  his  conception  of  the  idea  of  Messiah,  in  a  prophetic 
si)irit,  reached  its  very  acme.  Yet  we  cannot  define  precisely  the 
meanitjg  which  John  himself  attached  to  the  words ;  for  we  cannot 
suppose  in  him  a  doctrinal  conception  of  their  import  such  as  a  fully 
Christian  mind  would  have.f  His  was  a  prophetic  intuition,  bordering 
indeed  on  Christianity,  but  yet,  perhaps,  commingled  with  wholly  hete- 
rogeneous elements. 

After  John  had  thus  designated  the  character  of  Jesus,  to  whom  he 
wished  to  dii'ect  his  disciples,  he  repeats  anew  the  testimony  which  he 
had  before  publicly  given  "of  him  that  was  to  follow"  (although  prob- 
ably not  given,  in  the  first  instance,  with  the  same  confidence  as  to  the 
person),  and  applies  it,  in  stronger  terms,  to  Christ — "  This  is  he  of 
whom  I  said,  After  7ne  cometh  a  man  that  is  preferred  before  me,  for  he 
was  before  me."^  ("  Who  has  taken  a  higher  place  than  I,  according 
to  his  nature.") 

*  Hence  the  appropriateness  of  the  figure  of  the  lamb  rather  than  of  any  otlicr  animal 
nsed  in  the  offerings.  What  we  say  is  enough  to  indicate  the  grounds  on  whicli  we  differ 
from  other  interpretations  of  this  passage.     Conf  Liicke,  in  loc. 

t  We  do  not  suppose,  therefore,  that  the  Baptist  had  before  his  mind  the  full  sense 
which  the  Evangelist,  from  his  Christian  stand-point,  connected  with  the  words.  It  cannot 
be  known  with  certainty  but  that  the  former  used  the  word  DJ^,  which  the  latter  trans- 
lated KoVfioj.  From  a  mind  like  the  Evangelist's  we  could  hardly  expect  so  fine  a  dis- 
tinction between  tiie  objective  and  subjective  to  be  distinctly  marked  in  his  statement  of 
the  words  of  another.  He  perhaps  involuntarily  blended  them.  He  revered  the  memory 
of  the  Baptist,  his  spiritual  guide;  these  words  of  the  Baptist  had  greatly  tended  to  de- 
vclope  his  inner  life,  and  bad  led  him  to  Christ  ;  it  was,  therefore,  all  the  easier  for  him  to 
attribute  to  them  a  higher  Christian  sense  than  the  Baptist  had  when  he  uttered  them. 
The  interpretation  which  he  gave  to  them  may  also  thus  have  reacted  upon  the  form  in 
which  they  were  impressed  upon  his  memorj'.  This  view  does  not  in  the  least  impugn  die 
veracity  of  the  naiTative,  or  tend  to  show  that  John  was  not  its  author.  The  whole  tone 
of  the  Baptist's  words  is  consistent  with  his  character  and  habits.  Moreover,  as  we  have 
before  remarked  (p.  54),  the  kingdom  of  God,  as  spreading  among  the  h-eatlwri  nations,  had 
opened  partially  to  his  view  ;  he  may,  therefore,  in  the  passage  under  discussion,  have  had 
reference  to  mankind,  rather  than  to  the  Jewish  world. 

X  John,  i.,  30.  These  obscurely  prophetic  words  were  the  Baptist's  own,  and  not  put 
into  his  mouth  by  the  Evangelist.  But  this  only  makes  their  explanation  more  difficult. 
According  to  the  usage  of  the  Greek,  and  of  language  generally,  the  before  of  place  and 
time  may  express,  figuratively,  precedence  of  dignity,  and,  in  this  usage,  qimpoaBtv  nov 
yr/oi'cv  is  easily  interpreted,  "  althovgh  (in  the  order  of  timf)  he  comes  after  me,  yet  (in  the 
order  of  dignity)  he  wan  before  me.''  In  the  full  certainty  of  prophetic  intuition,  the  Baptist 
describes  this  as  already  realized.  It  is  hai-der  to  interpret  -pwrdi  ^ou  >/v.  Referring  the 
words  "he  was  before  me"  to  the  pre-exi/tence  of  Christ,  they  woidd  imply  that  his  dignitj' 
as  Messiah  was  to  grow  out  of  his  pre-existing  Divine  nature.  Nor  could  it,  in  this  case, 
be  said  that  the  Evangelist  had  involuntarily  modified  the  language  of  the  Baptist  by  an 
infusion  of  his  own  Clu-istian  ideas  ;  for,  in  the  mind  of  the  latter,  the  higher  conception  of 
the  person  of  the  Messiah,  as  well  as  of  his  work  and  kingdom,  may  have  been  developed 
from  a  profoundly  spiritual  interpretation  of  the  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament.  This 
much,  indeed,  is  implied  in  his  paj-tial  statements  (recorded  by  the  other  Evangelists)  in 
regard  to  the  peculiar  indwelHng  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  Messiah;  although  it  does  not 
follow  that  the  Baptist  was  fully  conscious  of  this.  It  remaiixs  a  question,  whether  it 
would  not  be  more  in  accordance  with  the  simple  conception  of  the  Baptist  to  take  r^pSiToi 
as  referring,  not  to  pre  existence,  but  to  priority  of  nature,  which  interpretation  I  have  fol- 

L 


162  CHRIST  IN  GALILEE, 

§  113.  Joliii  and  Andrew,  Disciples  of  John,  attach  themselves  to  Jesus. — 
Gradual  Attraction  of  others. 
These  words  of  the  Baptist  were  listened  to  by  two  Galilean  youths, 
who  stood  in  the  circle  of  his  disciples — John  and  Andrew.  It  was 
about  four  o'clock  in  the  afternoon,  when,  obeying  the  hint  of  the 
Baptist,  they  followed  Jesus ;  refraining,  however,  in  reverence,  from 
disturbing  his  meditations.  The  Saviour,  noticing  them,  turned  kindly 
and  asked  what  they  desired.  Even  then  they  did  not  venture  to 
express  their  longing  to  be  honoured  with  his  friendship  ;  but  only 
timidly  inquired  where  he  dwelt.  Anticipating  their  request,  he  kindly 
invited  them  to  visit  him.  The  few  hours  that  remained  before  evening 
were  spent  in  his  society.  This  was  their  first  impression  of  Christ ; 
he  left  it  to  work  in  their  hearts.  Thus  was  it  also  with  Simon  (John, 
i,,  42),  in  whom  Christ  discerned  in  a  moment  the  yet  dormant  spirit 
of  the  Wan  of  Rock.  And  those  whose  first  impressions  were  thus 
received  pointed  Christ  out  to  their  fellows;  and  thus  arose  l\\e  first 
circle  of  disciples,  which  accompanied  him  from  Perasa  back  to  Gali- 
lee.* 


CHAPTER  II. 

COMMENCEMENT  OF  CHRIST'S  PUBLIC  TEACHING. 

§  114.    The  Miraculous  Draught  of  Fishes. — Effect  of  the  Miracle 

on  Peter. 

ON  his  return  to  Galilee  Christ  at  once  began  his  labours  as  a 
teacher;  not,  however,  in  the  synagogues,  but  in  instructing  the 
groups  that  gathered  around  him.  He  betook  himself  first,  not  to  Naz- 
areth, his  native  place,  where  he  could  least  hope  to  be  received  as  a. 
prophet  (the  carnal  mind  looks  only  at  the  outward  appearance),  but 
to  the  little  town  of  Capernaum.  The  young  men  who  had  accompa- 
nied him  from  Peraea  were  from  the  neighbourhood  of  Capernaum 

lowed  in  the  text.  This  involves  no  tautology;  the  "becoming  greater"  is  derived  from 
tlie  '•  being  greater."  The  word  >iv  is  used,  and  not  lari,  to  indicate  that  the  "  priority  of 
essence"  yireceded  "the  pi-iority  of  dignity,"  which  was  not  obtained  hy  Christ,  in  its 
manifestation,  until  a  later  period.  It  is  an  oxymoron:  "he  was  that,  which  he  Iras  he- 
come."  Thus  interpreted,  the  passage  corresponds  to  what  John  says  of  Christ  in  another 
form,  in  Matt.,  iji.,  11.  If  this  view  be  adopted,  we  must  remember  to  distinguisli  between 
the  sense  in  which  the  Baptist  uttered  the  words  and  that  which  tlie  Evangelist,  from  his 
higher  Christian  consciousness,  attributes  to  them. 

*  John,  i.,  42-47.  It  is  apparent  from  John's  statement  alone  that  Christ  diil  not  take 
these  young  disciples,  who  were  afterward  to  be  his  organs,  immediately  into  close  fel- 
lowship, but  left  Uiem  for  a  while  to  themselves.  John  gives  us  no  furtlier  account  of  tlie 
forming  of  tlie  Apostolic  community  ;  he  presupposes  majiy  things,  which  we  mu.^t  en- 
deavour to  fill  up  by  comiiariiig  the  synoptical  Gospels. 


THE  DRAUGHT  OF  FISHES.  163 

and  Bethsaida ;  and  he  only  waited  for  a  suitable  opportunity  to  take 
them  into  closer  communion.  Such  an  opportunity  was  the  following: 
One  day,  as  he  was  walking  upon  the  western  shore  of  the  Sea  of 
Genesareth,  an  increasing  throng  of  eager  listeners  collected  about 
him.  Some  fishermen  who  had  toiled  all  night  and  brought  up  nothing 
but  empty  nets,  had  left  their  vessels  fastened  near  the  shore.  Jesus 
asked  Simon,  to  whom  one  of  the  fishing-boats  belonged,  to  push  it 
out  a  little  way  from  the  shore,  that  he  might  stand  on  board,  and  thus 
address  the  people  to  better  advantage.*  On  finishing  his  discourse, 
he  turned  to  Peter,  who  doubtless  was  anew  struck  with  the  power  of 
his  words,  and  told  him  to  cast  his  net  into  the  deep.  Although  lie 
had  toiled  all  night  in  vain,  he  obeyed  the  Master  at  a  word.  This  full 
confidence  of  Peter  shows  that  he  had  already  been  impressed  to  some 
extent,  at  least,  with  the  Divinity  of  Chi'ist.t  An  impression  of  the 
most  powerful  character,  however,  must  have  been  made  upon  him  (as 
a  fisherman)  by  the  wonderful  result  of  this  once  letting  down  of  his 
net,  after  the  vain  attempts  of  the  long  night  before.  The  manifesta- 
tion of  the  Divine  power  to  him  in  the  exercise  of  his  own  trade  was 
characteristic  of  the  Divine  operations  generally  in  the  history  of 
Christianity ;  he  was  thus  led  from  the  Carnal  to  the  Spiritual.|  All 
his  previous  impressions  were  revived  and  deepened  by  this  sudden  ex- 
hibition of  the  power  of  a  word  from  Christ,  and  the  Saviour  appeared 
so  exalted  that  he  felt  himself  unworthy  to  be  near  him  ["  Depart  from 
me,  for  I  am  a  sinful  man,  O  Lord  ./"]§     The  Divine  power  appears 

*  A  comparison  of  Luke,  v.,  with  Matt-,  iv.,  18,  will  vindicate  the  correctness  of  this  rep- 
resentation. Here  we  have  two  hidependent  statements :  that  in  Matthew  an  abbreviated 
one,  while  Luke's  is  the  vivid  and  circumstantial  account  of  an  eye-witness.  The  words 
of  Christ  to  Peter,  as  given  by  Matthew  (iv.,  19),  "  /  ivill  7nake  you  Jtshers  of  vicii,"  seem 
to  presuppose  an  event  such  as  the  miraculous  draught  of  fishes  ;  but  Matthew  presents 
them  as  entirely  isolated,  while  Luke  gives  the  occasion  of  them  verj'  graphically.  None 
but  those  abstractionists  who  must  measure  all  phenomena,  however  infinite  in  variety, 
upon  the  Procrustean  bed  of  their  own  logical  formulas,  will  see  in  this  account  the  stam[» 
of  a  legendary  story.  It  has  all  the  freshness  of  life  and  reality  about  it.  Whoever  is 
well  read  in  the  history  of  the  diffusion  of  Christianity  in  all  ages  will  be  able  to  recall 
many  analogous  cases.  Schlciermacher  (Comm.  on  Luke,  in  loc.  or  "  Werke,"  ii.,  53),  in 
his  remarks  on  this  case,  showed  with  what  nice  tact  he  could  distinguish  history  from  l<  - 
^e.nd.  Honour  to  the  memory  of  that  great  man,  whose  profoundly  logical  mind  humbled 
itself,  in  pure  love  of  Truth,  before  the  power  of  History ! 

t  It  also  confirms  the  account  in  John's  Gospel.  The  connexion  of  the  narrative  which 
I  have  given  abundantly  shows  that  Matthew's  account  is  not  irreconcilable  with  Luke's, 
or  both  with  John's,  as  some  suppose.  I  do  not  mean  to  say,  however,  that  the  connexion 
thus  made  by  comparing  all  the  accounts  was  present  to  the  minds  of  the  writers  severally, 
for  in  that  case,  doubtless,  the  form  of  their  narratives  would  have  been  diflerent  from 
what  it  is  now.  Such  discrepancies  can  surprise  no  man  who  has  attempted  to  gather  a 
connected  narrative  of  any  kind  from  several  distinct  accounts. 

\  Those  who  believe  in  a  Divine  teleological  government  of  the  world,  in  a  Providence 
which  makes  Nature  subserve  the  progress  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  must  regard  this  event 
as  one  of  those  in  which  the  border  line  between  the  natural  and  supernatural  is  hard  to 
be  distinguished,  and  which  form  the  point  of  transition  from  the  fonner  to  the  latter. 

$  On  account  of  this  peculiar  relation  between  Christ  and  Peter,  we  can  hardly  suppo.se 


164  CHRIST  IN  GALILEE. 

fearful,  in  its  holiness,  to  the  sinner  who  is  conscious  of  his  sinfulness; 
it  fills  him  with  consternation  ;  he  shrinks  back  from  it  witli  trembling. 
Infinite,  indeed,  in  view  of  the  law,  must  the  chasm  appear  between 
the  sinner  and  the  Divinely  exalted  Holy  One.* 

Christ  seized  upon  this  impression,  and,  glorifying  the  Physical  into 
the  Spiritual,  by  his  prophetic  explanation  of  the  phenomenon,  said  to 
Peter  [Fear  not ;  from  henceforth  thou  shall  catch  mcn^  :  "  Shrink  not 
back  in  fear.  Take  confidence  in  me.  Attach  thyself  henceforth 
whoUy  to  mo.  Thou  shalt  see  greater  proofs  of  my  power  than  this. 
In  fellowship  with  me  thou  shalt  achieve  greater  miracles.  From 
henceforth  thy  net  shall  catch  men." 

The  same  impression,  also,  caused  Andrew,  James,  and  Johnf  to 
join  themselves  from  thenceforth  more  closely  to  Jesus. 

§  115.    The  Calling  of  Nathanacl. 
In  the  case  of  a  John,  the  full  impression  of  Christ's  personality, 
first  received,  pre^iarod  the  depths  of  his  youthful  soul  for  sudden  and 

(although  much  may  be  said  in  favour  of  it)  that  this  event  occurred  after  he  had  known 
Christ  for  some  time,  or  after  he  had  been  a  witness  of  his  first  public  labours  at  Jerusalem  ; 
so,  also,  we  camiot,  for  the  same  reason,  place  it  after  the  wedding  at  Cana ;  although  tliis 
last  is  more  probable  than  the  other,  since  we  cannot  say  certainly  what  impressions  the 
occun-ences  at  Cana  made,  at  first,  upon  the  disciples.  The  view  which  we  have  followed 
in  the  text  seems  to  be  conti^adicted  by  the  connexion  between  John,  i.,  43,  and  46  ;  but 
there  is  no  real  contradiction.  The  calling  of  Nathanael  (John,  i.,  4G)  and  that  of  Philip  (i.. 
43)  are  not  necessarily  connected  in  place  and  time.  John  mentions  an  intended  return  to 
Galilee  (v.  43),  but  says  nothing  about  the  journey  itself;  he  may  have  been  induced,  bj- 
the  mention  of  Bethsaida,  to  place  the  theatre  of  the  account  in  that  region.  (See  Blcc/;, 
Stud.  u.  Krit.,  1833,  ii.)  The  late  B.  Jacohi  (in  the  same  periodical,  1838,  iv.,  852)  adduces" 
against  this  view  John's  accuracy,  in  this  passage,  in  mentioning  time  and  place.  It  i.s 
not  clear,  however,  that  John  meant  to  give,  in  each  case  in  the  chapter,  the  time  and  place 
exactly.  His  exactness  extends  only  to  the  events  which  served  to  lead  John's  disciples 
to  Christ;  and  it  is  not  at  all  evident  that  Nathanael  belonged  to  that  number.  The  way 
in  which  Philip  describes  the  Messiali  to  him,  sajing  nothing  of  the  Baptist's  testimony, 
rather  shows  the  contrary.  Moreover,  the  opposite  view  would  prove  that  Nathanael  was 
first  found  in  Galilee. 

*  The  truth  of  this  individual  trait,  as  narrated  of  Peter,  is  confirmed  by  the  subsequent 
devolopement  of  his  character.  The  consciousness  of  his  sinfulness  and  distance  from  the 
perfectly  Holy  One  must,  indeed,  have  remained;  and  his  .sense  of  the  loftiness  of  Christ 
could  be  diminished  by  no  degree  of  intimacy  with  him.  But  there  was  this  great  differ- 
ence between  the  two  periods  of  his  religious  life,  that  in  the  latter,  as  he  imbibed  more 
and  more  the  spirit  of  communion  with  Christ,  he  felt  himself  no  more  repelled  as  a  siinier 
from  Him  in  whom  the  source  of  Divine  life  for  men  was  revealed,  but  attracted  to  him, 
not  merely  by  his  own  spiritual  affinities,  but  by  his  personal  experience,  that  He  "had  the 
words  of  eternal  life."  The  redeeming-  power  of  tlie  Divine  One  wfis  more  and  more  fully 
revealed  to  him;  the  Divinity  api)eared  to  him  no  more  as  a  merely  outward,  but  as  an  in- 
ward power.  The  central  source  of  all  the  individual  rays  of  Divinity  shone  forth  upon  his 
conscionsness,  and  the  separate  rays  of  themselves,  therefore,  appeared  in  a  new  light. 

t  Luke  says  (v.  10)  that  James  ami  Jolm,  the  sons  of  Zebedee,  were  "  partners  with  Si 
mon  ;"  they  wore,  therefore,  eye-witnesses  of  that  event,  and  received  tlie  same  impression 
from  it.  In  Matthew's  statement  (iv.,  21)  they  were  with  their  father,  in  another  vess.l. 
"  mending  their  nets."  This  agrees  will  enough  with  Luke,  since  he  likewise  mentions 
two  vessels,  and — not,  indeed,  the  mending,  but — the  washing  of  the  much-used  nets. 


CALLING  OF  NATHANAEL.  165 

separate  impressions  of  the  Divinity  of  Jesus,  which  soon  brought  him 
to  a  complete  decision.  But  the  naa-row  prejudices  of  a  Nathanaei. 
had  to  be  overcome  by  a  separate  supernatural  sign  before  he  could 
receive  the  impression  of  Christ's  manifestation  and  nature  as  a  whole. 
When  Philip  first  announced  to  him  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  the 
Messiah,  he  expressed  both  surprise  and  incredulity  that  any  thing  so 
liigh  should  come  forth  from  a  corner  like  Galilee.  Instead  of  discuss- 
ing the  point,  Philip  appeals  to  his  own  experience,  and  tells  him  to 
"  come  and  see."  Nathanael's  prejudice  was  not  strong  enough  to 
prevent  his  compliance,  or  to  hinder  him  from  being  convinced  by  facts. 
Christ  sees  and  esteems  his  love  of  truth,  and  receives  him  with  the 
words,  "  Behold  an  Isj-adite  indeed,  in  whom  there  is  no  guile'''  (a  true 
and  honest-hearted  member  of  the  Theocratic  nation).  The  candid 
youth  is  surprised  to  find  himself  known  by  a  stranger.  He  expresses 
his  astonishment,  and  Christ  increases  the  impression  made  upon  his 
feelings,  by  a  more  striking  proof  still  of  his  supernatural  knowledge, 
telling  him  that  his  glance,  piercing  the  barriers  of  space,  had  rested 
on  him  before  Philip  called  him  as  he  stood  "  under  the  fig-tree"  (this 
probably  had  some  reference  to  the  thcrughts  which  occupied  his  mind 
under  the  fig-tree).  His  j^rejudices  are  readily  removed  [he  acknowl- 
edged Christ  as  "  Son  of  God  and  King  of  IsraeV^^ ;  Christ  admits 
that  he  is  in  the  first  stage  of  faith,*  but  tells  him  that  his  faith  must 
develope  itself  from  this  beginning,  and  advance  to  a  higher  aim  (John, 
i.,  50,  51).  A  faith  thus  resting  on  a  single  manifestation  might  easily 
be  perplexed  by  some  other  single  one,  that  might  not  meet  its  expec- 
tations. That  is  a  genuine  faith  (according  to  Chr'ist)  which  carries  it- 
self to  the  very  central-point  of  revelation,  seizes  the  intuition  of  Di- 
vinity in  its  immediate  nature  and  manifestation  as  a  whole,  and  ob- 
tains, through  immediate  contact  with  the  Divine  in  the  Spirit,  a  stand- 
point which  doubt  can  never  reach.  Nathanael  was  to  see  "  greater 
things"  than  this  isolated  ray  of  the  supernatural.  He  was  to  see  the 
"heavens  opened  upon  the  Son  of  Man,'"  into  whose  intimacy  he  was 
about  to  enter,  and  "  Angels  of  God  ascending  and  descending''''  upon 
him.  He  was  to  learn  Christ  in  his  true  relation  to  the  developement 
of  humanity,  as  Him  through  whom  liuraan  nature  was  to  bo  glorified  ; 
through  whom  the  locked-up  heavens  were  again  to  be  opened  ;  the 
communion  with  heaven  and  earth  restored  ;  to  whom  and  from  whom 
all  the  powers  of  heaven  were  to  flow.  Such  was  to  be  his  Divine 
glory  in  xXs  full  manifestation;  all  other  signs  were  but  individual  to- 
kens of  it. 

*  See  p.  138. 


166  CHRIST  AT  CANA. 


CHAPTER  III. 

JESUS    AT    CANA. 

§  116.   The  Change  of  Water  into  Wine. —  Character  and  Imj)ort  of  the 
Miracle. — Little  Impression  i7iadc  upon  the  People. 

THREE  days  aftei"  Christ  had  thus  set  fox'th  the  mode  in  which  he 
from  that  time  should  reveal  himself,  he  displayed,  at  a  wedding  in 
Cana,*  the  fulness  of"  the  power  of  heaven"  streaming  forth  from  him- 
self, which  was  to  transfigure,  as  he  had  said,  both  nature  and  humanity. 
Tlie  wine  ])rovided  for  the  occasion  gave  out,  and  Mary  requested  her 
Son  to  supply  the  lack  by  employing  the  powers  that  were  at  his  com- 
mand. Having  recognized  him  as  Messiah,  she  necessarily  expected 
him  to  work  miracles,  and  this  expectation  was  increased  by  the  im- 
pression which  he  had  made  in  the  short  time  that  had  elapsed  after 
his  consecration  to  the  Messianic  mission.  She  looked  impatiently  for 
the  hour  when  he  should  reveal  himself  in  his  glory,  as  Messiah,  before 
the  eyes  of  all  men. 

liut  Christ,  although  he  held  all  purely  human  feelings  sacred,  yet 
demanded  that  "  man  should  deny  father  and  mother"  when  the  cause 
of  God  required  it.  He  had  now  to  apply  this  principle  to  his  own 
mother,  and,  conscious  of  his  Divine  character  and  calling,  to  rebuke 
the  request  thus  made  to  him,  and  the  feelings  which  prompted  it. 
"  What  have  I  to  do  with  thee  ?  mine  hour  is  not  yet  come  ;"  as  if  he  had 
said,  "  Our  wishes  lie  apart.  My  Divine  powers  cannot  be  made  sub- 
sernent  to  earthly  aims  and  motives.  My  acts  obey  a  higher  plan  and 
loftier  laws,  in  accordance  with  which  each  of  them  has  its  appointed 
time.  As  yet,  the  moment  for  revealing  myself  in  my  Messianic  dig- 
nity, by  miracles  apparent  to  all  eyes,  has  not  arrived," 

Christ  intended,  as  he  here  intimates,  to  come  forth  gradualhj  from 
his  obscurity.  He  had  no  idea  of  displaying  his  glory,  as  Mary  wished, 
at  once.  Still,  as  she  might  have  been  accustomed  to  take  from  his 
words  and  look  more  than  he  uttered,  she  pi'obably  undei-stood  that  her 
wish  would  be  met,  so  far  as  the  fact  was  concerned,  though  from  a 
jioint  of  view  totally  different  from  her  own.  And  so  it  was  ;  the  thing 
was  done,  but  in  no  very  striking  way,  nor  in  a  way  calculated  to  re- 
veal his  -Messianic  glory  to  all  eyes. 

As  for  the  character  of  the  miracle  itself,  we  cannot  place  it,  as  some 
do,  among  the  highest  of  Christ's  miraculous  acts.     We  conceive  it 

*  It  is  to  be  remarked  that  Natlianael  \va.s  "  the  son  of  Tholmai,  "  /'.  c,  Bartholomew,  of 
Caiia  ;  which  fact  may  coiitinu  our  view  of  the  order  of  the  evculs. 


THE  WATER  CHANGED  TO  WINE.  167 

thus  :  He  brought  out  of  water,  by  his  creative  energy,  a  substance 
(wine),  which  is  naturally  the  joint  product  of  the  growth  of  the  vine, 
and  of  human  labour,  water  being  only  one  of  the  co-operating  factors ; 
and  thus  substituted  his  creative, power  for  various  natural  and  artificial 
processes.  But  we  are  not  justified  in  inferring  that  the  water  was 
changed  into  manufactured  loine ;  but  that,  by  his  direct  agency,  he 
imparted  to  it  powers  capable  of  producing  the  same  effects ;  that  he 
intensified  (so  to  speak)  the  powers  of  water  into  those  of  wine.*  In- 
deed, this  latter  view  of  the  miracle  conforms  better  to  its  spiritual  im- 
port than  the  former.t 

It  is  not  a  sufficient  explanation  of  \)ae,  final  cause  and  moral  bearing! 
of  the  miracle  to  say  that  Christ  intended,  by  thus  exhibiting  his  glory, 
to  incite  and  confirm  a  faith  in  his  calling.  We  must  seek  its  import 
rather  by  contemplating  it  in  reference  to  his  moral  self-revelation  as 
a  whole  ;  by  inquiring  how  the  peculiar  Spirit  of  Christ  was  reflected 
and  illustrated  in  this  single  act. 

While  in  retirement,  he  had  resembled,  in  the  austerity  of  his  life, 
the  ascetic  preacher  of  repentance,  John  the  Baptist.  Now,  however, 
in  the  very  beginning  of  his  public  labours,  no  longer  in  solitude,  but 
minjTlinfT  in  the  social  life  of  men,  he  enters  into  all  human  interests, 
shares  all  human  feelings,  and  thus  at  once  presents  a  contrast  to  the 
severe  legalism  of  John.  In  the  joyous  circle  of  a  wedding,  he  per- 
forms his  first  miracle  to  gratify  a  social  want.  Thus  he  sanctifies  con- 
nexions, feelings,  joys,  that  are  purely  human,  by  his  personal  presence, 
and  by  unfolding  his  Divine  powers  in  such  a  circle  and  on  such  an 
occasion.  In  this  view  the  miracle  gives  the  spirit  of  Christian  Ethics, 
wh(jse  task  it  is  to  apply  to  all  human  relations  the  image  of  Christ  as 

*  I  would  be  pleased  to  believe,  if  I  conld,  that  tbe  view  here  taken  had  as  old  ecclesi- 
astical authority  as  the  late  Bonni;.rarlen-Crusms  supposes  he  has  found  for  it,  in  tbe  ancient 
hymn  "  De  Epiphania  Domini"  {Daniel,  Thesaurus  Hjmnologious,  i.,  p.  19j :  "  Vel  hydriis 
plenis  aqua  vini  saporem.  infuderis."  But  the  word  saporem,  can  hardly  be  made  emphatic. 
In  the  sense  of  the  hymn,  the  words  "  vini  saporem  infundere''  probably  mean  nothinij 
more  than  "in  vLuura  mutare." 

t  Compare,  as  analogies,  the  mineral  xprings,  in  which,  by  natural  processes,  new 
powers  are  given  to  water ;  and  tbe  ancient  accounts  of  springs  which  sent  forth  waters 
like  wine — intoxicating  waters  :  "  HoAAaxuC  6'  chi  K/ifnai  at  piv  TTOTiiiwTcpat  xai  ohuiciaTcpai,  ui; 
tl -zfpi  na(p\ayoriin;  Tphi  m  "f"""  '■o'f  i)'X'^P^o^'i  ImoTrivctv  zooaiovTai." — AtheruEus, Deip., ii.,  §  17, 18. 
Of  another  water  says   Thexrpompui,  "roii  TrivovToi  airo  /icOucKcedai,  xaOa  xai  roii  tov  oivdv." 

t  The  supposition  that  John's  Gospel  was  written  by  some  one  of  Alexandrian  educa- 
tion, with  a  tendency  to  Gnosticism,  is  refuted  by  this  narrative.  Such  a  man  would  never 
have  assigned  such  an  object  and  such  a  scene  for  Christ's  first  miracle.  Such  a  one 
could  not  have  invented  and  put  into  the  mouth  of  the  "  ruler  of  the  feast"  the  clumsy 
jest  which  he  uttered  (John,  ii.,  9),  (although  we  do  not  (as  some  doi  lay  stress  upon  it,  and 
infer  that  the  guests  were  nearly  drunk).  Any  one  writing  a  historj'  of  Christ  apolo- 
getically, and  with  a  view  to  exalt  his  character  according  to  the  tendency  of  those  times, 
would  rather  have  altered  and  adorned  a  true  narrative  of  such  facts  (if  such  existed)  than 
have  invented  a  false  one  bearing  against  his  object ;  or,  if  he  had  some  symbolical  meaning 
in  his  view,  he  would  certainly  have  stated  it. 


168  CHRIST'S  FIRST  MINISTRY  AT  JERUSALEM. 

stamped  upon  his  self-revealed  life.  But  it  has  a  fuithei-  and  a  great 
symbolical  import :  Christ  employed  water,  one  of  the  commonest  sup- 
ports of  life,  as  the  vehicle  of  a  higher  power :  so  it  is  the  peculiarity 
of  Christ's  Spirit  and  labours,  the  peculiarity  of  the  work  of  Christianity 
not  to  destroy  what  is  natural,  but  to  ennoble  and  transfigure  it ;  to  en- 
able it,  as  the  organ  of  Divine  powers,  to  produce  effects  beyond  its 
original  capacities.  To  energize  the  power  of  Water  into  that  of  Win  . 
is,  indeed,  in  every  sense,  the  peculiar  office  of  Christianity. 

This  first  stay  of  Christ  in  Galilee  after  his  inauguration  as  Messiah 
was  attended  with  important  results  in  the  training  of  the  narrower 
circle  of  his  disciples  :  but  he  does  not  appear,  in  tliat  short  time,  to  have 
made  any  lasting  impression  upon  the  people.  There  were  few  so  in- 
genuous in  their  prepossessions  as  a  Nathanael ;  the  prejudices  of  many 
against  the  "  son  of  the  carpenter  at  Nazareth"  could  not  be  removed 
until  they  had  obtained  a  vivid  impression  of  his  public  labours  at  the 
feast  of  the  Passover  in  the  metropolis.  Even  in  this  beginning  of  his 
labours  in  Galilee,  he  had  probably  found  occasion  to  apply  the  Jewish 
proverb,  "  a  prophet  hath  no  honour  in  his  own  country y* 


CHAPTER  IV. 

FIRST  JOURNEY  TO  JERUSALEM  TO  ATTEND  THE  FEAST  OF  THE 

PASSOVER. 

§  117.  The  Purifying  of  the  Temple. 
jURING  the  feast  of  the  Passover  Jesus  appeared  at  Jerusalem 
in  his  prophetic  calling,  and  accredited  it  by  miracles.t  On  vis- 
iting the  Temple,  he  found  its  worship  disturbed  by  disorders  which 
desecrated  the  holy  place — a  picture  of  the  general  secularization  of 
the  Theocracy.| 

■'  John,  iv.,  44:  doubtless  referring  to  this  period  ;  a  supposition  which  the  use  of  )«/'  ren- 
ders probable.  Thus  interpreted,  we  should  have  John's  testimony  that  Christ  had  already 
sought  to  appear  as  a  teacher  in  Galilee. 

t  Although  the  purifying  of  the  Temple  doubtless  belongs  to  an  early  period  of  Christ's 
teachini,',  it  is  by  no  means  clear,  from  John's  account,  that  Christ  had  not  taught  and 
wrought  miracles  before  ;  indeed,  the  manner  in  which  the  priests  addressed  him  ratlier 
shows  the  contrary. 

{  Here  a  difliculty  arises:  the  cleansing  of  the  Temple  is  placed  by  John  at  tlie  legin- 
nitig  of  Christ's  ministiy,  during  his  first  stay  at  Jerusalem  ;  by  tlie  otlior  Evangelists  at 
the  end  of  his  labours,  during  his  last  stay  there.  Unless  the  same  event  took  place  tirice, 
and  in  the  very  same  way  (wliich  is  hardly  probable),  either  John  or  the  others  must  have 
deviated  from  the  chronological  ordor.  It  may  appear  more  probable  that  an  act  imidying 
so  great  power  over  the  priests,  and  the  throng  of  buyers  and  sellers,  was  done  after  his 
last  triumphal  entry,  when  the  people  were,  for  the  moment,  enthusiastic  in  his  favour,  than 


PURIFYING  OF  THE  TEMPLE.  169 

For  the  convenience  of  the  Jews  from  a  distance  who  wished  to  of- 
fer sacrifices,  booths  had  been  erected  in  the  Temple-court,  in  which 
every  thing  necessary  for  the  purpose  was  kept  for  sale,  and  money- 
changers were  also  allowed  to  take  their  stand  there ;  but,  as  might 
have  been  expected  from  the  existing  corruption  of  the  Jewish  people, 
many  foul  abuses  had  grown  up.  The  merchants  and  brokers  made 
every  thing  subservient  to  their  avarice,  and  their  noisy  huckstering 
was  a  great  disturbance  to  the  worship  of  the  Temple. 

It  was  Christ's  calling  to  combat  the  corruptions  of  the  secularized 
Theocracy,  and  to  predict  the  judgments  of  God  against  them.  And 
as  the  general  desecration  of  all  that  was  holy  was  imaged  in  these 
profane  doings  at  the  Temple,  he  first  manifested  against  them  his  holy 
anger.  Threatening  the  traders  with  a  scourge  of  small  cords,  he 
drove  them  out  of  the  Temple  ;  and  said  to  those  who  sold  doves, 
"  Take  these  things  hence  ;  make  not  my  Father'' s  house  a  house  of  mer- 
chandise."* 

These  words  are  not  only  applicable  to  the  special  case,  but  also 
contain  a  severe  reproof  of  that  carnal  tendency  which  debases  God's 
house  into  a  merchant's  exchange".  The  lifting  up  of  the  scourge  could 
not  have  been  in  token  of  physical  force,  for— apart  from  Christ's  char- 
acter— what  was  one  man  against  so  many]  It  could  only  be  a  sym- 
bolical sign — a  sign  of  the  judgments  of  God  that  were  so  soon  to  fall 
upon  those  who  had  corrupted  the  Theocracy.t 

There  was  no  miracle,  in  the  proper  sense,  wrought  here,  but  a  proof 
of  the  confident  Divine  power  with  which  he  influenced  the  minds  of 
men ;  an  example  of  the  direct  impression  of  Divinity,  of  the  power 
of  the  manifestation  of  the  Holy  One  as  a  punisher,  in  rousing  the 
slumbering  conscience.  Origcn,  who  found  many  difficulties  in  this 
narrative,!  and  was  inclined  to  regard  it  as  ideal  and  symbolical,  thought 

at  the  begiuuiug  of  his  labours.  On  the  other  hand,  he  would  have  had  more  occasion, 
after  his  triumphal  entry,  to  avoid  every  thing  that  could  occasion  public  disturbance,  or 
wear  the  appearance  of  employing  earthly  power.  As  for  the  difficulty  of  the  thing  at  his 
opening  ministry,  no  one  can  say  ii'hat  influences  the  immediate  power  of  God  might  pro- 
duce upon  the  minds  and  feelings  of  men.  It  is  certainly  less  easy  to  account  for  such  an 
anachronism  in  Julin,  whoso  account  is  all  of  a  piece,  and  accurate  in  chronological  order, 
than  in  the  other  Evangelists  ;  the  latter  might  naturally  connect  a  fact  like  this,  well 
adapted  to  oral  tradition,  with  the  la&t  entry,  which  was  the  only  one  mentioned  in  the  cir- 
cle of  accounts  which  they  compiled.  According  to  Joliu  (ii.,  18),  the  Jews  put  the  ques- 
tion, "  What  sign  showest  thou  us  1"  &c. ;  in  Luke,  xx.,  2,  the  Sanhedrim  ask,  "By  what 
authority  doest  thou  these  things  1"  &c.  It  might  be  supposed  that  tliis  last  question  sug- 
gested the  statement  of  the  event  which  gave  rise  to  it,  if  it  were  certain  (as,  indeed,  it  is 
not)  that  in  the  passage  in  Luke  it  has  this  special  reference  to  the  act,  and  not  a  reference 
to  Christ's  teaching  in  general  at  that  time. 

*  John,  at  most,  alludes  to  Isa.,  Ivi.,  7  ;  Jer.,  vii.,  11 :  but  the  other  Gospels  give  direct 
citations.     This  is  another  proof  of  the  origuiality  of  Jolm's  narrative. 

t  How  absurd  would  it  be  to  atti-ibute  the  invention  of  such  an  incident  as  this  to  a  man 
of  Alexandrian  culture  !  Its  utter  repugnance  to  Alexandrian  views  is  shown  by  the  fact 
that  Origen  considered  it  one  of  the  greatest  objections  to  the  credibility  of  the  naiTative. 

t  T.  ix..  in  Joann. 


170  CHRIST'S  FIRST  MINISTRY  AT  JERUSALEM. 

that  if  it  were  to  be  received  as  history*  the  miracle  would  be  greater 
than  the  change  of"  water  into  wine,  or,  indeed,  any  other  of  Christ's 
deeds  ;  as  in  this  case  he  would  not  have  had  to  act  upon  inert  and  life- 
less matter,  but  upon  living  beings  capable  of  resistance.  But,  on  the 
contrary,  no  miracle,  in  the  proper  sense,  was  wrought,  precisely  be- 
cause Christ  had  to  operate  upon  men,  endowed,  it  is  true,  with  a  will 
capable  of  resisting,  but  also  with  susceptibilities  that  had  to  yield  to 
the  moral  and  religious  fence  of  an  immediate  Divine  impression,  and 
with  conscience,  that  slumbering  consciousness  of  God  which  man  can 
never  wliolly  abnegate,  and  which  may  be  roused  by  a  commanding 
holy  power,  in  a  way  that  is  not  to  be  calculated.  There  are  many 
things  in  history  tbat  must  be  regarded  as  myths  by  minds  that  judge 
only  by  the  standard  of  every-day  reality. 

§  lis.  The  Saying  of  Christ,  "■Destroy  this  Temj^h,'"'  ^r. — Additional 
Exj^osition  of  it  given  hy  John. 

Some  of  the  priests  asked  Christ  by  what  signs  he  could  prove  his 
authority  to  act  thus.  He  gave  them  an  answer,  at  once  reproof  and 
prophecy,  "  Destroy  this  temple,  and  in  three  days  I  ivill  raise  it  up.'" 

The  most  natural  and  apparent  interpretation  of  tliese  words,  accord- 
ing to  the  circumstances  under  which  they  were  uttered,  laying  no  par- 
ticular stress  upon  the  specification  of  "  three  days,^'  would  be  the  fol- 
lowing :  "  ^V]le'n  you,  hy  your  ungodliness,  ^chich  desecrates  all  that  is 
holy,  have  hrovght  about  the  destruction  of  the  Tcmpile,  then  tvill  I  build 
it  up  again  /"  alluding  (according  to  the  mode  of  conception  every 
where  prevalent  in  the  New  Testament)  to  the  relation  between 
Christianity  and  Judaism.  The  kingdom  of  God  had  a  common  basis 
in  both  ;  the  new  spiritual  Temple  which  Christ  is  to  erect  among  men 
is,  therefore,  represented  as  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  rebuilt  after  its 
destruction  ;  the  latter  being  a  symbol  of  the  destruction  of  the  entire 
Jewish  worship,  which  was  identified  with  the  Temple  itself.  The 
Temple  and  the  kingdom  of  God  are  identical  in  Judaism  and  iu 
Christianity  :t  there,  in  a  form  particular  and  typical ;  here,  in  a  furni 
corresponding  to  its  essence,  and  intended  for  all  men  and  all  ages. 
As  Christ  is  conscious  that  the  desecrated  and  ruined  Temple  will  be 
raised  up  by  him  in  greater  splendour,  he  acts  upon  this  consciousness, 
as  reformer  of  the  old  Temple,  in  the  very  beginning  of  those  labouis 
which  are  to  lay  the  foundation  of  the  new  and  spiritual  one. 

But  what  a  glance  into  futurity  was  required  in  him  thus  to  foretell 

*  Origin,  however,  oxag-gcratcd  the  throng  that  Christ  Iind  to  cxpol  into  thrmsaiKtst. 
John,  more  simply  than  the  other  Evangelists,  speaks  only  of  the  expulsion  of  the  sellers  ; 
they,  of  the  hiiyers  also. 

t  Just  as  the  "  Honsc  of  God"  (Hob.,  iii.,  2-6)  is  made  the  same  in  both  dispensations  ;  as 
the  later  one  fulfills  the  law  of  the  older.  I  cannot  see  any  force  in  Kline's  objections 
(Stud.  u.  Krit.,  1836,  i.,  K'~).     The  Kaitdv  is  alrcadj-  implied  in  the  iyelpetr. 


"DESTROY  THIS  TEMPLE,"  &c.  171 

not  only  the  luiu  of  the  Temple  by  the  guilt  of  the  Jews — the  dissolu- 
tion of  their  worship  being  necessarily  identified  therewith — but  also 
the  erection  of  the  spiritual  Edifice  tliat  was  to  take  its  place;  to  pre- 
dict in  himself  the  mightiest  achievement  in  the  history  of  humanity, 
at  a  time  when  but  a  few  apparently  insignificant  men  had  joined  him, 
and  even  they  had  but  a  distant  dawning  idea  of  what  he  intended  to 
accomplish  !  So  vast  a  meaning  was  involved  in  those  dark  words — 
dark,  as  all  prophecies  are  dark !  An  analogous  meaning  was  con- 
tained in  his  expression  on  another  occasion,  "  Here  is  something 
greater  than  the  TeTnple  ;^'*  showing,  perhaps,  that  he  was  accustomed 
thus  to  point  from  the  terapoiary  Temple  to  the  higher  one  which  had 
already  appeared,  and  which  would  still  further  reveal  itself  in  the 
course  of  his  laboui's. 

Among  the  accusations  brought  against  Christ  by  the  false  witnesses, 
at  a  later  period,  was  this,  that  he  had  said,  "  I  am  able  to  destroy 
the  Temple  of  God,  and  to  build  it  in  three  days."]  Some  may  suppose 
that  the  editor  of  our  Greek  Matthew  may  have  been  ignorant  of  the 
occasion  and  the  true  sense  on  which  the  words  were  uttered  by  Christ, 
and  therefore  attributed  them  entirely  to  the  invention  of  the  witnesses. 
It  is  likely,  however,  that  the  testimony  was  c^\ed  false  by  Matthew, 
because  the  witnesses  pei'\'erted,  and  put  a  false  construction  on  Christ's 
real  words ;  he  had  not  said  that  "  he  would  destroy  the  Temple,"  but 
(what  is  very  different)  that  its  destruction  would  be  brought  about  by 
the  guilt  of  the  Jews.  The  priests  might  very  naturally  have  falsely 
reported  the  words,  in  order  to  put  a  sense  upon  them  that  would  not 
bear  against  themselves  so  closely,  and  which,  at  the  same  time,  would 
appear  more  obnoxious  to  the  people.  In  Mark,  xiv.,  58,  the  words 
are  still  more  perverted  by  the  false  witnesses :  "  I  loill  destroy  this 
Temple  that  is  made  ivith  hands,  and  within  three  days  I  icill  build 
another^X  Not  that  they  understood  Christ  that  he  would  build  a 
spiritual  temple  instead  of  the  visible  one ;  but,  probably,  that  he 
could,  after  destroying  the  latter,  replace  it  in  greater  glory  by  magic 
(after  the  visionary  representations  of  the  Chiliasts),  or  cause  one  to 
descend  from  heaven.  Even  one  of  the  thieves  on  the  cross  malevo- 
lently quoted  these  words  against  Christ.  All  this  shows  that,  what- 
ever amazement  the  words  excited,  they  had  made  a  great  and  general 
irapression.§ 

*  See  above,  p.  89.  t  Matt.,  xxvi.,  Gl. 

1  Mark  observes  (xiv.,  59) ;  "But  neither  so  did  their  witness  agree  together." 
6  It  is  a  special  confirmation  of  John's  Gospel  that  he  alone  gives  the  natural  occasion 
for  the  utterance  of  these  words  by  Christ,  and  their  original  fomi.  Strauss,  however, 
thinks  that  the  original  form  of  the  expression  was  that  put  into  Stephen's  month  by  his 
accusers,  Acts,  vi.,  14  ;  and  that  the  "  three  days"  were  added  subsequently,  with  reference 
to  the  resuiTection.  But  these  are  not  Stephen's  words,  nor  is  it  even  attributed  to  him 
that  he  quoted  Christ's,  but  only  that  he  uttered  a  tliought  of  his  own,  perhaps  derived 
from  them.    At  any  rate,  the  mention  of  the  "  three  days"  would  have  been  unsuited  to 


172  CHRIST'S  FIRST  MINISTRY  AT  JERUSALEM. 

The  faithfulness  of  John  is  strikingly  shown  by  the  way  in  which  he 
distinguishes  his  own  interpretation  of  these  words  of  Christ  from  the 
words  themselves.*  Christ,  in  uttei'ing  them  (according  to  John's  ex- 
planation), pointed  to  his  own  body  [refei-ring  to  the  resurrection]. 

Although  this  does  not  appear  to  bear  so  directly  upon  the  aim  of 
Christ  at  the  time,  and  upon  the  question  of  the  Jews,  as  the  view 
given  above,  it  yet  may  involve  the  following  deeper  import,  viz. : 
"  The  Temple  at  Jerusalem  is  only  a  temporary  place  consecrated  to 
God ;  but  Christ,  in  his  human  nature,  shall  build  up  the  everlasting 
Temple  of  God  for  man.  The  former  shall  be  destroyed,  and  not  re- 
built; but  the  body  of  Christ,  the  temple  of  the  indwelling  Divine 
Nature,  shall  rise  triumphant  out  of  death."t 

The  first  interpretation  seems  to  us  more  simple,  and  to  connect  itself 
more  naturally  with  Christ's  intention  ;  but  the  latter  has  the  advantage 
in  giving  a  more  intelligible  bearing  to  the  "  three  days."| 

the  thought  ascribed  to  Stephen.  The  interpolation  of  the  words  "  three  days"  is  more  im- 
probable, as  neither  Matthew  nor  Mai-k  explain  them  at  all;  on  the  contrary,  it  is  much 
more  likely  that  the  presence  of  the  words  led  to  their  being  applied  subsequently  to  tl)e 
resurrection,  than  that  the  resurrection  itself  led  to  their  interpolation. 

*'  It  may  be  disputed  whether  John's  intei-pretatiou  is  intended  to  give  the  exact  sense 
in  which  Christ  used  the  words  [or  only  accommodated  them  to  the  resuiTection,  as  is  per- 
haps implied  in  the  22d  verse,  "  u-hcn,  therefore,  he  was  risen  from  the  dead,  his  disciples  re- 
membered (hat  he  had  said  this  unto  them''^.  An  instance  of  such  accommodation,  of  words 
uttered  by  Christ,  in  a  sense  different  from  the  original  one,  is  found  in  John,  xviii.,  9 ;  al- 
tliougb,  in  this  case,  John  must  have  known  that  he  applied  them  differently,  and  was 
glad  to  find  them  admit  such  application.  John's  autliority,  in  regard  to  the  sense  of  the 
words  of  the  Master  whom  he  followed  so  devoutly,  and  whose  sayings  he  preserved  so 
faithfully,  is  necessarily  of  great  weight ;  still,  in  tlie  explanation  of  special  expressions  [as 
to  their  original  import],  the  natural  relations  and  connexions  might  compel  us  to  deviate 
from  him.  Nor  would  tliis  at  all  conflict  with  Inspiration,  rightly  understood,  which  would 
only  require  that  the  explanation  given  by  the  Evangelist  should  be  true  in  itself  although 
the  words  might  not  be  applied  with  Christ's  original  meaning.  He  would  none  the  less 
be  the  proclaimer  of  the  tchole  truth  made  known  to  him  by  the  illumination  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  The  mention  of  the  "three  days"  (which  cannot,  indeed,  be  easily  explained,  ex- 
cept by  the  resurrection)  might  have  led  the  author  of  this  Gospel,  who  alwa3's  dwelt  with 
peculiar  fondness  upon  every  thing  that  concerned  the  person  of  Christ,  at  once  to  think  of 
his  resurrection.  The  interpretation  given  by  the  Evangelist  is  a  further  proof  against  the 
theory  that  this  Gospel  had  a  later  Hellenistic  or  Alexandrian  origiu.  It  would  have  ac- 
corded much  better  with  the  taste  of  that  school  to  apply  Christ's  words,  in  the  grand 
prophetic  bearing,  to  the  building  of  the  spiritual  Temple  (the  >'ao5  -vtviiariKos,  in  place  of 
the  vabi  uiaOriTOi)  than  to  the  resuirection  of  his  body. 

t  I  agree  with  Kling's  (1.  c.)  refutation  of  certain  modern  objections  to  John's  explana- 
tion, and  also  with  his  view  of  the  impossibilitj'  of  connecting  the  two  interpretations 
together. 

t  Many  passages  have  been  quoted  by  others  to  prove  that  "three  days"  must  necessarily 
mean  a  time  of  short  duration,  but  I  am  not  yet  convinced  of  it.  In  general,  it  means  "a 
round  number,"  and  we  must  learn  from  the  context  whetlier  a  longer  or  shorter  period  is 
intended.  In  this  case  the  contrast  with  the  length  of  time  taken  to  build  the  Temple  jus- 
tifies us  in  assuming  that  a  short  period  is  meant.  The  new  spiritual  Temple,  the  progres- 
sive developement  of  the  new  spiritual  kingdom  of  God,  did  in  fact  immediately  follow  the 
overthrow  of  the  old  fonn  of  the  Tlieocrac^-. 


NICODEMUS.  173 

§  119.  Interview  of  Christ  with  Nicodemus. 

(1.)  Disposition  of  the  People  and  Pharisees  towards  Christ. — Dispositions  of  Nic- 
odemus. 

Many  of  the  people  were  attracted  to  Christ  during  this  his  first  stay 
at  Jerusalem.  And  although  the  prevailing  Pharisaic  party  looked 
upon  him  with  an  eye  of  suspicion,  they  could  not  openly  oppose  him, 
as  he  had  not  as  yet  arrayed  himself  against-  their  statutes  and  tradi- 
tions, but  directed  his  blows  against  abuses  which  no  one  dared  to  de- 
fend. And  even  of  the  Pharisees  it  cannot  be  supposed  that  all  were 
hypocrites,  governed  only  by  selfish  motives ;  doubtless  there  were 
many  whose  piety,  however  debased  by  the  errors  of  their  entire  sys- 
tem, was  yet  sincere.*  Such  could  not  remain  without  Divine  impres- 
sions from  the  words  and  works  of  Christ. 

A  specimen  of  this  better  class  was  NicoDEMUs.t  To  him,  especially, 
the  miracles  of  Jesus  appeared  to  be  works  transcending  all  merely 
human  power,  and  undeniable  signs  of  a  Divine  calling.  Beyond  this 
general  impression,  however,  he  had  no  clear  views  of  Christ's  person 
or  mission  ;  and  his  desire  to  obtain  more  definite  information  was  the 
greater,  because  he  had  participated  in  the  expectations  awakened  by 
John  the  Baptist,  in  regard  to  the  approaching  reign  of  Messiah, 
Recognizing  Christ  as  a  prophet,  he  determined  to  apjily  to  him  per- 
sonally, and  came  to  him  by  night,  to  avoid  strengthening  the  suspi- 
cions of  his  colleagues  in  the  Sanhedrim,  probably  already  aroused 
against  him. 

We  may  presuppose  that  he  shared  in  the  ordinary  Jewish  concep- 
tions of  the  Messianic  kingdom,  and  expected  it  soon  to  be  founded  in 
visible  and  earthly  glory  ;  although  he  may  have  had,  at  the  same  time, 

*  It  is  probable,  in  the  nature  of  things,  that  although  the  Pharisees,  scribes,  and  chief 
men.  as  a  whole,  were  ill-disposed  to  Christ,  there  were  among  them  individual  suscepti- 
ble minds.  In  the  first  Gospels  we  find  Joseph  of  Anmathea  ;  in  Matt.,  ix.,  18,  a  ruler  ;  in 
Mark,  xii.,  28,  a  scribe,  manifesting  an  interest  in  his  Divine  c.illing,  and  from  these  we 
may  infer  the  existence  of  other  cases.  There  is  no  ground,  therefore,  for  S/rauss's  asser- 
tion that  the  case  of  Nicodemus  is  improbable.  Utterly  uuhistorical,  too,  is  his  assertion 
(i.,  633)  that  the  accounts  of  rich  and  chief  men  coming  secretly  to  Christ  (and  so  of  Nico- 
demus) were  invented  at  a  later  period,  to  remove  the  reproach  brought  against  the  primi- 
tive Christians,  "that  none  but  the  poor  and  illiterate  attached  themselves  to  Jesus."  In- 
stead of  being  a  "reproach,"  it  was  the  pride  and  gloiy  of  the  primitive  Church  that  the 
new  creation  of  Christianity'  began  among  the  poor;  that  the  wise  of  this  world  were  put 
to  shame  by  the  ignorant.  There  was  no  inducement,  then,  for  such  inventions.  More- 
over, this  mode  of  thinking  pervades  the  whole  of  John's  Gospel;  he  that  could  represent 
Jesus  as  unfolding  his  highest  truths  to  a  poor  woman  could  not  have  been  tempted  to  iii- 
vent  a  conversation  between  him  and  a  distinguished  sciibe. 

t  Slrauss  strains  hai'd  to  give  a  symbolical  and  mythical  meajimg  to  this  comanon  Jew- 
ish name,  '^'^''i'p^-  There  is  no  trace  in  the  early  Christian  history  of  mytliical  persons 
thns  originating  from  mere  fancy,  without  any  historical  point  of  departin-e.  Only  at  a  later 
period  was  the  history  of  really  eminent  men  exaggerated  by  (voluntary-  or  involuntarj'} 
invention  into  fables  ;  e.  g-,  Simon  Magus  was  thus  made  mythical. 


174  CHRIST'S  FIRST  STAY  IN  JERUSALEM 

some  more  worthy  and  spiiitual  ideas  in  regard  to  it.  He  considered 
himself  sure,  as  a  rigidly  pious  Jew  and  Pharisee,  of  a  share  in  that 
kingdom,  and  was  only  anxious  to  be  informed  as  to  the  approaching 
manifestation  of  Messiah. 

Addressing  Christ  as  an  enlightened  teacher,  accredited  from  God 
by  miracles,  he  expected  to  obtain  fiom  his  lips  a  further  account  of 
his  calling  and  of  his  relation  to  the  Messianic  kingdom.  But  instead 
of  entering  upon  this,  Christ  purposely  gives  an  answer  especially 
adapted  to  the  moral  and  religious  wants  of  Nicodemus,  and  all  of  like 
mind.*  The  truth  which  he  uttered  was  not  only  new  and  strange  to 
Nicodemus,  but  also  fundamentally  opposed  to  his  whole  system  : 
"  Excejjt  a  man  he  Lorn  again,]  he  cannot  sec  the  hingdom  of  Qod^ 

(•2.)     The  New  Birth. 

Uprooting  the  notion  that  any  particular  line  of  birth  or  descent  can 
entitle  men  to  a  share  in  God's  kingdom,  Christ  points  out  an  inward 
condition,  necessary  for  all  men  alike,  a  title  which  no  man  can  secure 
by  his  own  power.  His  answer  to  Nicodemus  presupposes  that  all 
men  are  alike  destitute  of  the  Divine  life.  It  was  directed  as  well 
against  the  arrogant  self-righteousness  of  the  Pharisees  as  against  the 
contracted  externalizing  of  the  kingdom  of  God  in  Jewish  particular 
ism.  It  involves  also  (although  we  are  not  sure,  from  the  form  of  the 
expression,  that  Christ  intended  precisely  this)  that  a  faith  like  that  of 
Nicodemus  was  insufficient ;  springing,  as  it  did,  from  isolated  mira- 
cles, and  not  from  inward  experience,  or  an  internal  awakening  of  the 
Divine  life.  Certainly  it  hit  the  only  point  from  which  Nicodemus 
could  and  must  proceed  in  order  to  change  his  mode  of  conceiving  the 
Messianic  kingdom.  Even  if  he  at  first  still  expected  it  to  appear  as 
an  outward  one,  he  must  have  had  a  higher  and  nobler  moral  concep- 
tion of  it.  He  doubtless  took  Christ's  words  "  cannot  sec  the  kingdom'' 
to  mean  "  cannot  share  in  the  visible  kingdom  ;"  while  Clti-ist  meant  an 
inward  spiritual  "  entering  into'''  that  kingdom  which  was  first  to  be 
founded,  as  a  spiritual  one,  in  the  hearts  of  men.| 

*  An  answer,  too,  entirely  characteristic  of  Jesus,  and  which  vvoiilJ  not  have  occunrd  to 
one  inveiUing  this  dialogue. 

t  Or  "from  above;"  but  I  caiinot  prefer  this  reading,  even  after  I.ucke's  argnmenfs. 
"  Born  again"  corresponds  with  "  becoming  tike  children"  (Malt,  xviii.,  3) ;  with  iruAi)')  £»«- 
o(a  (Matt.,  xix.,  28) ;  compared  with  the  >ovTpbv  TraXiyyti'toi'aj  of  Paul.  We  infer  that  tliis 
mode  of  expression  belonged  to  the  peculiar  type  of  Christ's  teaching,  as  it  agrees,  also, 
with  his  expressions  (recorded  in  the  first  three  Gospels)  in  regard  to  his  operations  upon 
hnman  nature. 

I  The  idea  of  a  "  new  birth"  was  not  unknown  to  the  Greek  and  Roman  mind,  although 
its  true  import  is  only  revealed  in  tlie  light  which  Christianity  lends  to  self  scnitiny.  The 
nan  emendari,  scd  tronsfigurari  of  Seneca  (Ep.  ad  Lucil.,  vi.),  whicli  is  ratlier  a  rhetoric.Tl 
expression  any  liow,  applies  to  a  gradual  amendment  of  character  by  lopjiing  olT  scpavati- 
vices,  and  not  to  a  radical  change  of  nature.  As  the  Christian  new  birth  is  the  beginning 
of  a  jn-Qcess  in  hiunon  nature,  wliich  is  to  go  on  until  tlic  consunmjation  of  the  kingdom  of 


NICODEMUS.  175 

The  mere  figure  of  a  new  birth,  in  itself,  would  have  been  notlung  so 
unusual  or  unintelligible  to  Nicodemus  ;  he  could  have  understood  it 
well  enough  if  applied,  for  instance,  to  the  case  of  a  heathen  submit- 
ting himself  to  circumcision  and  the  observance  of  other  Jewish 
usages.*  But  what  startled  him  was  the  altogether  novel  application 
which  Christ  made  of  the  figure;  not  to  a  change  of  external  relations, 
as  in  the  case  above  supposed,  but  to  a  totally  different  change,  of  which 
the  learned  scribe  had  not  the  glimmering  of  an  idea.  He  knew  not 
what  to  think  of  such  an  answer  to  his  question,  and  no  wonder ;  a 
dead,  contracted,  arrogant  scribe-theology  is  always  amazed  at  the  mys- 
teries of  inward,  spiritual  experience.  This  first  direct  impression, 
perhaps,  did  not  allow  him,  at  the  moment,  to  distinguish  between  the 
figure  and  the  thing,  and  he  asked,  "  Hoiv  can  a  man  be  born  when  he 

is  old  r 

(3.)  The  Birth  of  Water  and  of  the  Spirit. 

But  Christ  confirms  what  he  had  said,  and  explains  it  further  :  "  Ver- 
ily, except  a  man  be  born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter 
into  the  kingdom  of  God."j  He  thus  describes,  more  exactly  the  active 
principle  (the  creative  agent)  o^the  new  birth,  the  Divine  Spirit,  which 
implants  a  new  Divine  life  in  those  who  give  themselves  up  to  it;  pro- 
ducing a  moral  change,  a  reversion  of  the  universal  tendency  of  man, 
as  the  offspring  of  a  race  tainted  by  sin. 

So  much  is  clear.     But  what  shall  we  say  of  the  "  water  l'^^     We  in- 

God,  the  new  birth  in  individaals  preparing  the  way  for  the  new  birth  of  a  glorified  world  ; 
so  the  Stoic  doctrine  speaks  of  a  TreptooiKl)  TraAiyyti'ta/a  twv  '6\<iiv,  avaaToiXcionriS.  But  this  is 
<»nnected  with  the  pantheistic  conception  of  a  cycle  of  alternate  destructions  and  renew- 
als of  the  world,  utterly  opposed  to  the  teleological  point  of  view  in  Christianity.  'O  rec 
capaKOVTOVTriii  liiv  I'ouv  o-onovovv  cxri,  vavra  tu  yfj'oi'orn!  kuI  ra  laoncva  ctipaKC  Kara  to  hjioci&H — [Ait,- 
ton.  Monol.,-s.\.,  1.)  "He  who  lives  only  forty  years  and  observes  well,  has  experienced 
every  thing  which  occurs  in  the  whole  eternity  of  this  ever-renewed  process." 

*  Strauss  thinks  (p.  701)  that  the  way  in  which  Paul  uses  the  expression  "  a  neic  crea- 
tion" (2  Cor.,  v.,  17  ;  Gal.,  vi.,  ],^),  without  explahiing  it,  implies  that  it  was  in  conunon  use 
in  Judaism.  We  do  not  agi-ee  with  Ivim,  but  rather  see  in  such  expressions  the  new  dia- 
lect created  by  Christianity,  which  Paul's  readers  might  be  supposed  to  understand.  If 
Strauss' s  view  were  correct,  we  should  expect  such  antitheses  in  Paul  as  the  following: 
"  Circumcision  cannot  develope  a  new  creation  in  the  heathen,  but  leaves  all  in  its  old  con- 
dition ;  a  new  creation  can  only  grow  out  from  within,  through  faith." 

t  How  different  the  words  of  (Christ,  in  their  original  simplicity,  were  from  the  later  dress 
given  to  them,  may  be  seen  by  comparing  ,Tohn.  iii.,  5,  with  the  Clementines,  Horn.,  xi.,  ^ 
26  :  "  iuv  lit)  ava)  tvvndriTt  viari  OSin  iii  ovojiu  TT.iTpbi,  viov,  ayiov  -nviVfiaTOi,"  &c.  It  is  immaterial 
whether  this  passage  was  borrowed  from  John's  Gospel  immediately,  or  from  some  tradi- 
tion. 

{  It  is  said,  by  some,  that  the  hand  of  a  later  writer  is  to  be  traced  here,  who  plannej 
this  conversation,  half  fiction,  half  truth,  upon  the  basis,  perhaps,  of  an  earlier  narrative, 
and  added  "birth  by  water"  to  "birth  by  spirit,"  in  order  {o  give  additional  authority  to 
baptism  in  the  Church.  But  this  theory  is  contradicted  by  the  fact  that  baptism  is  only 
incidentally  mentioned  by  John ;  that  he  nowhere  expressly  ascribes  its  institution  to  Christ, 
and  nowhere  says  any  thing  of  the  baptism  of  the  Apostles.  A  writer  influenced  by  an 
ecclesiastical  intent,  and  permitting  himself  to  remodel  the  history  of  Christ  from  such  a 


17G  CHRIST'S  FIRST  STAY  IN  JERUSALEM. 

fer  from  the  fact  that  Christ  says  nothing  more  of  "  water,"  but  pro- 
ceeds to  explain  the  operations  of  the  "  Spirit,"  that  the  former  was 
only  a  point  of  departure  to  lead  to  the  latter.  It  was  the  baptism  of 
the  Spirit,  the  "  birth  of  the  Spirit"  into  a  new  Divine  life,  that  was 
unknown  to  Nicodemus  ;  whereas  John's  baptism  might  have  already 
made  him  acquainted  witli  water  as  a  symbol  of  inward  purification, 
pointing  to  a  higher  purification  of  soul,  to  be  wrought  by  the  Messiah, 
and  aiding  in  its  comprehension. 

After  this  preparation,  Christ  sets  forth  the  general  piinciple  on 
which  his  previous  declarations  to  Nicodemus  were  founded,  viz.,  the 
total  opposition  between  the  natural  life — the  life  of  all  those  who  con- 
tinue to  live  according  to  nature  simply — and  the  new  life  which  God 
imparts  ["  That  toJiich  is  born  of  the  JicsJt  is  flesh,  and  that  which  is 
horn  of  the  Sjnrit  is  Sjjirit"].  But  as  this  "  birth  of  the  S^jirit"  was 
still  strang-e  to  Nicodemus,  Christ  made  use  of  a  sensible  imaEre  to 
bring  it  more  vividly  before  him.  "  As  none  can  set  bounds  or  limits 
to  I  he  wind,  as  one  hears  and  feels  its  blast,  but  can  not  track  it  to  its 
source  or  to  its  aim;  so  it  is  with  the  breath  of  God's  Spirit  in  those 
who  have  experienced  the  new  birth.  There  is  something  in  the  in- 
terior life  not  to  be  explained  or  comprehended,  which  reveals  itself 
only  in  its  operations,  and  can  be  known  only  by  experience  ;  it  is  a 
life  which  no  one  can  trace  backward  to  its  origin,  or  forward  to  its 
end." 

The  light  begins  to  dawn  upon  Nicodemus.  But  to  his  mind,  yet 
in  bondage  to  a  legal  Judaism,  prone  to  conceive  all  Divine  things  in 
an  outward  sense,  and  to  keep  God  and  man  too  far  apart,  the  fact  as- 
serted by  Christ  seems  marvellous ;  and  he  exclaims  in  amazement. 
'•'■How  can  this  heV  Jesus  seizes  upon  this  exclamation  to  humble 
the  pride  of  the  learned  theologian,  to  convince  him  of  his  want  of  in- 
sio-ht  into  Divine  things,  and  to  make  him  feel  the  need  of  further  illu- 
mination. "  You,  a  teacher  of  Israel,  and  this,  witliout  which  all  reH- 
gion  is  a  dead  thing,  not  known  to  you  !  And  if  you  believe  me  not 
when  I  speak  of  a  mere  matter  of  fact,  which  every  man  upon  earih 
may  test  by  his  own  experience,*  how  will  you  believe  when  I  pro- 
claim truths  beyond  the  circle  of  man's  experience  and  transcending 
the  limits  of  his  reason;  when  I  tell  you  the  hidden  and  unfathomable 
counsels  of  God  for  human  salvation  !" 

niotive,  would  not  have  made  those  oraii|sions.  It  might  even  be  said,  with  more  plausi- 
bility, that  John  had  been  led  to  connect  baptism  and  roqenei-ation  together,  and  had  at- 
tributed this  ooudiination  tt)  Christ.  We  have  no  riglit,  because  of  a  mere  difBciilty,  to 
charge  such  a  thing,  even  though  invohintaiy,  upon  the  faithful  disciple.  The  wliole  turn 
of  .John's  feelings,  the  viynf.ic  element  (in  its  good  sense)  that  predominated  in  his  mind, 
would  alone  have  prevented  him  irom  maj<.ing  any  oiitiviird  Uimg  iirominent  that  was  tuil, 
made  so  in  the  original  words  of  Christ. 

*  A  Jewish  believer  could  understand  this,  from  its  analogy  to  separate  impulses  of  the 
Divine  life  experienced  under  Judaism. 


NICODEMUS.  177 

(4.)     Jesus  intimates  his  own  Sufferings. 

This  introduction  prepares  us  to  expect  something  totally  opj^osed  to 
the  ordinary  conceptions  of  the  Jewish  scribes.  It  would  have  been 
quite  inappropriate  if  Christ  had  merely  been  about  to  speak  of  the  ex- 
altation of  Messiah,  for  that  idea  was  familiar  enough ;  or  even  if  he 
had  been  about  to  apply  that  exaltation  personally  to  himself  as  Mes- 
siah ;  for  this  claim  could  not  appear  very  marvellous  to  Nicodemus, 
who  was  already  inclined  to  recognize  him  as  a  prophet.  But  nothin<( 
could  have  been  more  startling  to  Jewish  modes  of  thought,  or  even  to 
the  mind  of  Nicodemus,  who  was  still  in  bondage  to  the  outward  letter, 
than  an  intimation  that  Messiah  was  not  to  appear  in  earthly  splendour, 
but  was  to  found  the  salvation  of  mankind  upon  the  basis  of  his  own 
sufferings*  This  was  indeed,  and  ever,  the  stumbling-block  of  the 
Jews. 

But  Christ  did  not  announce  this  truth,  so  strange  to  Nicodemus, 
plainly  and  in  full  breadth.  Employing  a  well-known  figure  from  the 
Old  Testament,  he  compared  the  lifting  up  of  the  Son  of  Man  with  the 
serpent  that  was  raised  in  the  wildernesst  before  the  eyes  of  all  the 
people ;  and,  having  thus  intimated  the  truth  to  the  scribe  by  a  simile 
drawn  from  his  own  familiar  studies,  he  left  it  to  be  further  developed 
by  his  own  thoughts.  The  brazen  serpent  may  have  appeared  to  the 
fathers  a  paradoxical  cure  for  the  serpent's  bite  ;  and  such  a  paradox  is 
the  salvation  of  the  world  through  a  suffering  Messiah.  The  very 
strangeness  of  the  comparison  must  have  stimulated  the  mind  of  Nico- 
demus.| 


w 


CHAPTER  V. 

JESUS  AT  ^NON,  NEAR  SALIM. 

E  cannot  fix  with  certainty  the  length  of  Christ's  first  stay  in 
Jerusalem  after  the  beginning  of  his  public  ministry.     But  it  is 


"  See  p.  83,  84. 

t  Conf.  the  explanation  of  Jacohi.     (Stud.  u.  Krit.,  1825,  pt.  i.) 

X  The  words  of  Christ  end  with  ver.  15,  we  think.  Nicodemus  had  the  goad  in  his  mind, 
enough  to  wake  him  out  of  liis  spiritual  slumber,  and  urge  him  to  deeper  thought  upon  the 
tnith,  partly  clear  and  partly  obscure,  to  which  he  had  listened.  In  the  nature  of  the  case, 
therefore,  Jesus  would  not  be  likely  to  add  any  thing  further.  The  verses,  16-21,  have  al- 
together the  air  of  a  commentary  added  by  the  Evangehst,  from  the  fullness  of  his  heart 
and  experience.  He  has  seen  the  working  of  the  Gospel,  and  tbe  judgments,  too,  which 
attend  its  preaching,  and  he  records  them.  John's  Gospel  is  a  selection  from  the  history  of 
the  Gospel,  made  with  a  definite  purpose ;  he  begins  it  with  a  reflection,  and  he  frequently 
interrupts  the  narrative  with  a  course  of  reflection,  as  appears  to  us  to  be  the  case  in  the 
passage  under  consideration.    Verse  16  takes  up  and  repeats  Christ's  closing  words  in 

M 


178  CHRIST  AT  .ENON. 

certain  that  he  went  directly  thence  to  JEnon*  near  Sahm  (Salumias),  a 
part  of  the  country  which  was,  at  that  time,  the  theatre  of  John  the 
Baptist's  labours.  Here  he  probably  spent  most  of  the  time  from  the 
Passover  to  the  late  harvest.  He  may  have  had  two  objects  in  this, 
viz.,  to  continue  the  training  of  his  disciples  more  uninterruptedly,  and 
also  to  make  use  of  the  connecting  link  which  the  ministry  of  John  the 
Baptist  afforded.  The  reason  for  the  continuance  of  the  latter's  sepa- 
rate labours  has  already  been  mentioned.! 

§  120,  Jealousy  of  John's  Disc'qdes. — Final  Testimony  of  the  Bajitist. 
— His  Imjjrisonmejit. 

The  rapid  growth  of  Christ's  sphere  of  labour  excited  the  jealousy 
of  many  of  John's  disciples,  who  would  hear  of  no  other  master  but 
their  own,  and  who  had  not  imbibed  enough  of  his  spirit  to  know  that 
he  was  to  give  way  before  the  higher  one.  They  had  seen  tliat  Christ 
obtained  his  first  disciples  by  John's  testimony  in  his  favour.  Having 
no  desire  themselves  to  go  beyond  .John's  teaching,  they  did  not  strive 
to  understand  that  testimony  fully,  and  deemed  it  unreasonable  that 
Christ,  who  owed  his  first  followers  to  the  recommendation  of  their 
i^vvn  master,  should  exalt  himself  above  the  latter.  But  when  they 
mentioned  their  surprise  to  John,  he  answered  them,  "  Do  not  wondei 
at  this  ;  it  had  to  be  so.  No  man  can  usurp  what  Heaven  has  not 
granted  him.  (No  man's  labours  can  transcend  the  limit  appointed 
by  God.  Christ's  influence  pi-oclaims  the  Divinity  of  his  calling.  Men 
would  not  join  him,  if  God  did  not  give  them,  in  him,  what  I  could 
never  bestow.)"  He  then  calls  them  to  witness  that  he  had  never  an- 
nounced himsef  to  them  as  Messiah,  but  always,  and  only,  as  the  Fore- 
runner :  "  I  said  I  am  not  the  Ch?-ist,  but  that  I  am  sent  before  Iiim.'" 

It  is  to  be  observed  (and  it  confirms  what  we  have  said  of  the  histor- 
ical position  of  the  Baptist)  that  he  does  not  here  appeal  to  his  private 
declarations  as  to  Christ's  Messiahship,  made  to  individual  susceptible 
disciples,  but  only  to  his  continuous  public  testimony.      The  jealous 


verse  15,  and  explains  them,  as  the  yap  obviously  shows.  The  marlis  of  a  cliauge  in  tlic 
speaker  seem  to  me  very  evident.  It  appears  to  be  characteristic  of  John  not  to  mark 
such  transitions  very  distinctly  ;  although,  of  course,  he  could  never  intend  to  intermix  his 
own  words  with  those  of  the  Saviour. 

*  I  y\y,  a  name  derived  from  1'^  ("  a  place  aboundins;  iti  water"),  John,  iii.,  23.  Euse- 
nius  {Oiwmaslikon)  says  that  such  a  place  was  still  pointed  out,  eight  Romnn  miles  south  of 
Scythopolis,  near  Saliin  and  the  Jordan.  (Hicron.,  0pp.,  c<l.  Vallars,  iii.,  1G3  ;  Ko.'Ciiinti/hr, 
Handb.  d.  Biblisch.  Altcrth.,  ii.,  2,  13.?;  RohinsoH'K  Palestine,  iii.,  322.)  This  suits  tl:e 
place  described  in  John,  as  Christ  goes  thence  to  Samaria.  If  it  appear  strange  that  the 
Baplisl  should  go  to  Samaria,  it  is  to  be  remarked  that  the  place  belonged,  as  a  border 
town,  to  Judca;  and  the  Baptist  may  have  found  it  necessary,  in  order  to  av(>id  i)ersc<u- 
tion,  to  betake  himself  to  tliis  out-of-the-way  comer.  Perhaps,  also,  with  his  more  liberal 
tendency  of  mind,  he  had  no  scruples  about  abiding  on  the  borders  of  Samaria. 

t  Page  57. 


JOHN  THE  BAPTIST.  179 

spirits,  therefore,  may  never  have  had,  from  the  hps  of  their  master, 
any  ^uch  special  direction  to  Christ. 

But  he  added,  "  My  goal  is  reached  ;  my  joy  is  fulfilled.  I  have  led 
the  Bride  (the  Theocratic  congregation)  to  the  Bridegroom  (the  Mes- 
siah), to  whom  she  belongs,  who  alone  can  fulfil  her  hopes.  He  must 
increase,  but  I  must  decrease."* 

In  uttering  these  words  the  Baptist  probably  had  a  presentiment 
that  the  end  of  his  career  was  at  hand.  When  he  returned  to  the  other 
side  of  the  rivei",  Herod  Antipas,  who  ruled  in  Peraea,  succeeded  in 
laying  hold  of  him.  The  rigid  censor  of  morals,  who  had  no  respect 
for  persons  where  the  holy  law  of  God  was  concerned,  had  offended 
the  tetrarch  ;t  and,  by  order  of  the  latter,  he  was  conveyed  as  a  pris- 
oner to  the  border  fortress  of  Machcerus.| 

*  John,  iii.,  30.  Thus  far  the  words  bear  the  stamp  of  the  Baptist,  their  me.ining  being 
figuratively  iiitiinated  rather  than  expressed.  But  those  which  follow  (31-36)  are  totally 
different.  The  Evangelist,  having  in  his  own  Christian  experience  so  rich  a  coininentary 
upon  the  words  of  his  former  Master,  feels  bound  to  a[)ply  it  in  explaining  them.  The  re- 
lation of  the  Baptist  to  Christ  sets  aside  all  that  has  been  said,  in  later  times,  about  some 
imaginary  person's  having  invented  this  scene  and  tacked  it  on  to  John's  Gospel.  Had 
such  a  one,  as  Strauss  thinks,  made  the  fiction  in  order  to  oppose  the  disciples  of  the  Bap- 
tist (who  kept  aloof  from  Christianity)  by  the  authority  of  their  own  master,  he  would  have 
i/oue  much  further;  it  would  have  been  just  as  easy,  and  far  more  effective,  to  invent  a 
dialogue  between  Christ  and  the  Ba()tist  himself  The  apocryphal  writings  of  that  period, 
manufkctured  to  favour  certain  religious  ideas,  were  not  wont  to  confine  their  inventions 
within  such  narrow  limits. 

t  Josephus  differs  from  the  Gospels  (Matt.,  xiv.,  3-5;  Mark,  vi.,  17-20;  Luke,  iii.,  19--20) 
as  to  Herod's  reasons  for  this  act ;  according  to  the  latter,  it  was  done  because  John  had 
reproved  him  for  carrying  off  and  marrying  his  brother  Philip's  wife  ;  according  to  the  for- 
mer, the  teti-arch  was  induced  by  fear  of  political  disturbances.  "  ^ciaas  ri  inl  rocdvie  :it- 
6av&v  aVTov  toU  aidpiiizoiS  ^17  f':;(  axooTuctt  Tivt  (pipor  iravra  yilp  iwKcaav  ovuSovXfj  rfj  ixeivov  Trpdlovres, 
TToM  KpuTTOV  I'lYcirai,  npiv  ti  vcwrcpov  il  uiiTou  ycviaOat,  7r/)«Aa6wi'  aialptiv  >)  /.uraSo'Krji  y tvojiivni  dq 
Ta  irpdynaTa  lixTreaCbv  utTavoeiv." — (Arcliaeol.,  xviii.,  v.,  §  2.)  Now  the  character  of  the  Evan- 
gelists, as  historians,  would  not  be  affected,  if  we  admit  that  they  followed  the  popular  re- 
port, even  though  incorrect,  as  the  matter  had  no  comiexion  with  their  immediate  object. 
But  tlie  difficulty  is  cleared  up,  and  a  better  insight  into  the  nature  of  tlie  case  obtained, 
by  the  supposition  that  Josephus  gave  the  osfcnxible,  and  the  Evangelists  the  real  and  se- 
cret reason  that  impelled  Herod.  As  the  Baptist  did  not  claim  to  be  Messiah,  and  exhorted 
the  people  to  fidelity  in  the  several  relations  of  life,  Herod  could  have  had  no  political 
fears  except  such,  indeed,  as  might  arise  from  John's  honest  boldness  in  reproving  his  sins. 
It  is  a  further  proof  of  his  personal  hatred  to  John,  that  he  not  only  imprisoned,  but  killed 
liim.  History  affords  many  instances  in  which  faithful  witnesses  to  the  truth  have  falleu 
victims  to  the  craft  of  priests  or  women,  and  often  of  the  two  combined. 

I  Supposing  that  John  appeared  in  public  about  six  months  before  Christ,  and  that  he 
was  imprisoned  about  the  same  length  of  time  after  Christ's  first  Passover,  his  whole  pub- 
lic ministry  lasted  for  about  a  year. 


180  CHRIST  AND  THE  SAMARITAN  WOMAN. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

JESUS  RETURNS  THROUGH  SAMARIA  TO  GALILEE.— THE  SAMARITAN 
WOMAN.     (Jolai,  iv.) 

THE  Pharisaic  party  became  more  suspicious  of  Jesus  than  they  had 
been  of  the  rigid  preacher  of  repentance,  when  it  was  found  that 
his  ministry  was  beginning  to  attract  still  greater  attention  than  John's 
had  done.  He  determined,  therefore,  to  leave  that  part  of  the  coun- 
try.* Galilee  offered  a  safe  abode  ;  and,  besides,  a  good  spiritual  soil 
for  his  instructions  would  probably  be  found  there,  as  deep  impres- 
sions had  been  made  upon  the  minds  of  many  Galileans  attending  the 
Passover,  by  his  public  labours  at  Jerusalem.  He  took  the  shortest 
road — three  days'  jouniey — to  Galilee,  through  Samaria  ;  and  made  use 
of  the  opportunity  to  scatter  seeds  for  the  future  among  the  people  of 
that  country,  who  were  then  longing  for  new  revelations,  and  among 
whom  no  political  perversions  of  the  Messianic  idea  were  to  be  found, 
as  among  the  Jews. 

§  121.  I>npressio?is  viade  upon  the  Samaritan  Woman. 
In  the  mean  time  the  summer  months,  and  part  of  autumn,  had 
passed  away.  It  was  in  seed  time,  which  lasted  from  the  middle  of 
October  to  the  middle  of  December,  that  Jesus  arrived  in  the  fertile 
plain  of  SicJiem.  Fatigued  with  travelling,  he  stopped  to  refresh  him- 
self about  middayf  at  the  well  of  Jacob.  He  was  alone,  for  he  had 
sent  his  disciples  into  the  city  to  buy  provisions  ;  not  without  the  inten- 
tion, probably,  to  elevate  them  above  the  Jewish  prejudice  which  re- 
garded the  Samaritans  as  unclean.  While  he  sits  by  the  well-side,  a 
poor  woman  from  the  neighbouring  city  comes|  to  draw  fresh  water. 
He  asked  her  for  water  to  quench  his  thirst,  and  embraced  the  occa- 
sion (as  he  always  embraced  every  moment  and  opportunity  to  fulfil 
his  Divine  calling)  to  plant  in  her  soul  the  seeds  of  Divine  truth.§ 

*  Here  is  the  occasion  pf  Matthew's  statement,  Matt.,  iv.,  12.  But  as  the  first  three 
Gospels  only  speak  expressly  of  Christ's  last  journey  (see  p.  155),  no  distinction  is  made 
between  his  stay  in  Galilee  before  and  af/er  his  first  journey.  Hence  arose  the  mistake 
as  to  the  time  of  John's  imprisomueut,  to  correct  which  eiTor  in  the  tradition  probably  John, 
iii.,  24,  was  intended. 

t  That  traveluii,'  could  be  continued  until  twelve  o'clock  shows  that  it  must  have  been 
late  in  autumn.  t  This,  too,  could  not  have  been  done  at  that  hour  in  summer. 

§  Here  is  another  refutation  of  the  theory  that  assigned  an  Alexandrian  origin  to  this 
Gospel  A  man  trained  in  that  school  would  have  been  as  little  disposed  as  a  Jewish  the- 
ologian of  Palestine  to  rciiresent  Jesus  as  conversing  with  a  poor  woman  and  disjilaying 
to  her  the  prospect  of  a  new  future  of  relicfious  developement !  But  it  was  perfectly  in 
Keeping  with  the  character  of  Him  who  tliaiiked  God  that  "  what  had  been  liidden  from 


THE  WATER  OF  LIFE.  181 

Adapting  his  mode  of  teaching  to  her  condition  and  culture,  he  made 
use  of  a  natural  figure,  offered  by  the  occasion  ["  If  thou  knewest  the 
gift  of  God,  and  ivho  it  is  tliat  saith  unto  thee,  '  Give  tne  to  drink,'  thou 
ivouldst  have  asked  of  him,  and  he  would  have  given  thee  living  water"]. 

The  figure  was  admirably  adapted  to  awaken  in  her  as  yet  unspirit- 
ual  mind  a  longing  for  the  precious  possession  thus  intimated,  before 
she  could  apprehend  the  nature  of  the  possession  itself  ["  Whosoever 
drinketh  of  the  water  that  I  shall  give  him  shall  never  thirst :  it  shall 
be  in  him  a  well  of  water  springing  up  into  everlasting  life'''].  How 
joyfully  must  she  have  heard  of  water,  ever  fresh  and  flowing,  which 
one  could  always  carry  with  him,  and  never  need  thirst  or  be  weary 
with  constant  travelling  the  dusty  road  to  draw !  And  so,  under  this 
figure,  Christ  pictured  forth  for  her  the  Divine  life  which  he  had  come 
to  impart,  which  alone  can  quench  the  thirst  of  the  soul,  and  is,  for  all 
who  receive  it,  an  endless  stream  of  life  flowing  onward  into  eternity  ! 

After  thus  exciting  in  her  mind  a  desire  for  the  mii'aculous  water,  of 
which  she  could  as  yet  form  no  just  conception,  he  breaks  off  without 
giving  her  further  explanations  of  whaf,  at  that  time,  she  could  not  be 
made  to  understand.  He  turns  the  conversation,  first,  to  make  her 
look  within,  as  self-knowledge  alone  can  prepare  us  rightly  to  appre- 
hend Divine  things  ;  and,  secondly,  to  satisfy  her  that  he  was  a  proph- 
et by  showing  an  acquaintance  with  parts  of  her  private  history  of 
which,  as  a  stranger,  he  could  have  known  nothing.* 

§  122.   Christ's  Decision  between  the  Worship  of  the  Jews  and  that 
of  the  Samaritans. 

Struck  with  his  insight  of  her  secret  history,  the  woman  recognizea 
him  as  a  prophet.  She  must,  in  consequence,  have  supposed  that  a 
higher  sense  lay  hid  in  what  he  had  uttered,  enigmatical  as  it  yet  ap- 
peared to  her,  and  she  laid  it  up  in  her  mind.  It  was  natural,  also,  for 
her  to  question  him  further,  as  a  prophet,  on  religious  subjects,  and 
thus  elicit  from  him  new  instruction.  And  what  question  so  likely  to 
occur,  or  fraught  with  deeper  interest  to  her,  than  that  which  formed 

the  wise  had  been  revealed  unto  babes,"  and  who  had  come  to  break  down  all  barriers  that 
separated  men,  and  to  glorify  human  nature  even  in  the  form  of  woman ! 

*  It  has  been  made  a  question  whether  Christ,  at  the  moment  when  he  requested  the 
woman  to  call  "her  husband"  (John,  iv.,  16),  had  the  full  and  supernatural  knowledge  of 
her  real  circumstances,  and  only  spoke  thus  to  her  in  order  to  test  her  disposition,  and  in 
duce  her  to  speak  of  her  course  of  life  with  candour;  or  whether  he  had  not  that  knowl- 
edge at  the  moment,  and  really  wished  her  husband  to  come,  in  order  to  open  a  communi- 
catiou  with  the  Samaritans ;  so  that  the  final  turn  of  the  conversation  was  different  from 
what  he  had  expected.  We  are  not  acquainted  with  the  laws  under  which  the  beams  of 
supernatural  knowledge  broke  forth  from  the  soul  of  Christ,  nor  with  the  relation  between 
external  occasions  and  the  internal  developement  of  his  higher  knowledge.  And  therefore 
we  cannot  say  whether  the  woman's  explanation,  that  "  she  had  no  husband,"  excited  the 
Btreajning  forth  of  the  Divine  light  within  him  or  not. 


182  CHRIST  AND  THE  SAMARITAN  WOMAN. 

the  bone  of  contention  between  the  Jews  and  Samaritans,  and  which 
was  suggested  to  her  by  the  very  spot  on  which  they  stood,  Mount 
Gerizini  itself  towering  up  just  at  hand  ["  Our  fathers  tvorsh'rpj'cd  'm 
this  mountain,  and  ye  say  that  in  Jerusalem  is  the  place  where  men 
ought  to  ivorshi2y']. 

The  answer  of  Christ  has  a  two-fold  reference  :  one  to  the  existing 
stage  of  the  Theocracy,  thus  answering  the  spirit  of  the  woman's  ques- 
tion ;  the  other  alluding  to  the  higher  stage  of  the  Theocratic  devel- 
opement  which  he  himself  was  about  to  introduce. 

In  regard  to  the  first,  he  decides  (v.  22)  in  favour  of  the  Jews. 
"  The  Samaritans  are  ignorant  of  the  true  worship  of  God,  because 
they  reject  the  prophets,  the  several  stages  of  revelation  that  have  pre- 
pared the  way  for  that  which  is  the  aim  of  all,  the  manifestation  of  the 
Redeemer ;  the  Jews,  on  the  other  hand,  do  worship  God  intelligently,* 
since  they  7iave  recognized  his  successive  revelations,  and  are  thus  fitted 
to  be  the  medium  through  which  salvation  may  come  forth  for  men  ; 
to  lead  to  which  salvation  is  the  end  and  aim  of  all  God's  revelations. 
Jerusalem,  meanwhile,  had  to  be  the  seat  of  worship,  because  from 
Jerusalem  the  Redemption,  which  was  to  raise  worship  to  a  higher 
sphere,  was  to  spring  up." 

§  123.    The  JVorshij)  of  God  in  Spirit  and  in  Truth. 

Christ  thus  showed  that  the  worship  at  Jerusalem  was  only  preferred 
in  view  of  the  salvation  that  was  to  come  forth  there,  and  that  the  su- 
periority would  cease  at  the  time  of  its  coming  foith.  He  had,  then,  to 
describe  that  higher  era  before  which  the  question  in  dispute  between 
Jews  and  Samaritans  would  wholly  cease :  "  The  hotir  cometh,  and 
voic  is,  when  the  true  worshij^pers  shall  worshij)  the  Father  in  spirit  ami 
in  truth,  for  the  Father  seeheth  such  to  worship  him  :  God  is  Spirit,  and 
they  who  worship  him  must  worship  him  in  spirit  and  in  trutliT  To  the 
worship  of  God  as  previously  conceived — the  sensuous,  external  wor- 
ship, confined  to  special  times  and  a  fixed  place — Christ  opposes  a 
worship  limited  by  neither,  but  proceeding  from  the  Spirit,  and  em- 
bracing the  whole  being.  The  true  worship  of  God,  as  Spirit,  can 
only  spring  from  Divine  affinities  in  the  Spii'it. 

And  such  worship  can  only  be  "  Worship  in  the  Truth  ;"  the  two  are 
inseparable  ;  the  Truth  must  be  taken  up  into  the  life  of  the  Spirit  be- 
fore it  can  utter  spiritual  worship — Truth,  the  Divine  element  of  life, 
the  link  that  binds  the  world  of  spirits  to  God,  their  original.  As  wor- 
ship in  spirit  is  opposed  to  that  which  is  confined  wholly,  or  chiefly,  to 
isolated  outward  acts,  so  worship  in  the  Truth  is  opposed  to  that  which 

*  This,  of  course,  is  only  said  oljecUvcli/,  witli  reference  to  the  stfind-poiiit  of  the  Jew- 
i.sh  nation  ;  suhjeciivdy,  applied  to  indiv-iduals,  it  would  only  be  true  of  those  who  corre- 
spond ill  spirit  to  tlie  definition  that  foUows. 


THE  WORSHIP  IN  SPIRIT.  i83 

adheres  to  sensuous  types  and  images  that  only  veil  the  truth,  And 
this  true  spiritual  worship  can  only  flow  from  those  who  are  in  com- 
munion of  life  with  God,  as  Father. 

Christ  used  the  words,  "the  time  cometh,  and  is  nmv,"  because  the 
true,  spiritual  woi'ship  was  realized,  in  its  perfection,  in  himself;  and 
because  he  had  planted  seeds  in  the  hearts  of  his  disciples,  from  which 
it  was  to  develope  itself  in  them,  and  through  them  in  all  mankind. 

§  124.    The  Spiritiml  WorsJiij). — Its  Bearing  vpon  Practical  Life. 

Christ  uttered  here  no  merely  theoretical  truth,  bearing  only  upon 
knowledge,  but  one  eminently  practical,  and  including  in  itself  the  whole 
work  which  he  was  to  accomplish  in  humanity.  The  sages  of  both  the 
East  and  the  West  had  long  known  that  all  true  worship  must  be  spir- 
itual ;  but  they  believed  it  impossible  to  extend  such  worship  beyond 
the  nanovV  circle  of  thoughtful  and  spiritually  contemplative  minds ; 
nor  did  they  even  know  rightly  how  to  realize  it  for  themselves.  They 
sought  in  Knowledge  what  could  only  spring  from  Life,  and  was  in 
this  way  to  become,  not  the  privilege  of  a  favoured  few,  but  the  com- 
mon good  of  all  men. 

On  the  other  hand,  Christ  not  only  gave  the  true  Idea,  but  realized 
it.  As  Redeemer  of  men,  he  placed  them  in  a  relation  to  God,  through 
wliich  the  tendency  to  true  and  spiritual  worship  is  imparted  to  their 
whole  life.  He  made  the  Truth  which  he  revealed  the  source  of  life 
for  men ;  and  by  its  means,  as  spirits  allied  to  God,  they  worship  him 
in  Truth.  Only  in  proportion  as  men  partake  of  the  Divine  life,  by 
appropriating  Christ's  revealed  truth,  can  they  succeed  in  worshipping 
God  in  spirit  and  in  truth. 

The  knowledge  of  God  as  Spirit  was  by  no  means  communicated  to 
men  ready  made  and  complete.  It  was  to  develope  itself  in  the  re- 
flective consciousness  otily  from  true  worship  of  God,  rooted  in  the 
life ;  here,  and  hei-e  only,  were  men  to  learn*  the  full  import  of  the 
words,  "  God  is  Spirit."t 

How  has  the  lofty  truth,  the  world-historical  import,  of  this  saymor 
of  Christ  been  lost  sight  of  by  those  who  have  taken  it  as  an  isolated 
expression,  apart  from  its  connexion  with  Christian  Theism  and  with 
the  whole  Divine  process  for  the  developement  of  Christian  life,  by 
those   abstract,  naked,  one-sidedly  intellectual  Deists   and  Pantheists 

*  The  history  of  religious  opinions  in  the  first  three  ceaturies  affords  most  vivid  proof 
of  this.  E.  g. :  "  -S.V  -vwiia,  d  airXovaTcpov  hXajiiidvontv,  cuiia  Tvyx<'i'oi'."  (Orig.  in  Joann.,  t 
Xiii.,  §  -22.) 

\  This  great  truth,  rightly  understood,  was  closely  connected  with  the  moral  and  rehgious 
wants  of  the  Samaritans,  as  represented  by  the  woman.  The  natural  order  of  this  con- 
versation, the  simphcity  and  depth  of  Christ's  words — so  free  from  the  dilFuseness  charac- 
teristic of  iutoutioual  imitation — is  a  strong  proof  of  its  originality-. 


184  CHRIST  AND  THE  SAMARITAN  WOMAN. 

who  have  dreamed  that  they  could  incorporate  them  into  their  dis- 
cordant systems  by  their  spiritual  Fctichism,  which  substitutes  the 
deification  of  an  Idea  for  the  spiritual,  truthful  adoration  of  God  as 
Spirit !  The  aristocracy  of  education,  the  one-sided  intellcctuaUsm  of 
the  ancient  world,  was  uprooted  by  Christ  when  he  uttered  this  grand 
truth  to  an  uneducated  woman,  who  belonged  to  an  ignorant  and  un- 
cultivated people :  For  all  men  alike,  the  Highest  must  spring  from 
life  [and  not  from  culture]. 

§  125.   Christ's  Glances  at  the  future  Trogress  of  his  Kingdom,  and  at 

his  own  Death. 

After  Christ  had  made  himself  known  as  Messiah  to  the  Samaritan 
woman,  she  hastened  joyfully  to  the  city  to  tell  the  strange  things  that 
had  happened  to  her.  Her  countrymen  came  out  in  throngs  at  her 
call.  In  the  mean  time,  however,  the  disciples  had  returned,  and  found 
their  Master  just  closing  his  conversation  with  the  woman;  and,  although 
both  surprised  and  curious,  they  asked  no  questions  about  the  occasion 
or  subject  of  the  conversation. 

But  they  wondered  that  he  did  not  touch  the  provisions  they  had 
brought.  His  corporeal  wants  are  forgotten  in  the  higher  thoughts 
that  occupy  him  ;  the  work  of  his  life  is  before  him,  the  planting  of  the 
seeds  of  Divine  truth  in  a  human  soul,  and  through  it  in  many  others, 
even  beyond  the  limits  of  the  Jewish  people.  The  Samaritan  woman 
is  an  exponent  of  this  new  progress  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  Her 
countrymen  are  approaching ;  the  seed  is  already  germinating.  He 
replies,  therefore,  to  his  disciples,  "  I  have  meat  to  eat  tvhich  ye  hnoio 
not  of.  (The  nourishment  of  the  body  is  forgotten  in  that  of  the  Sjnrit.) 
My  meat  is  to  do  the  will  of  him  that  sent  me,  and  to  finish  his  work  (to 
sow  the  seed  for  the  general  diffusion  of  the  kingdom  of  God  among 
men)." 

He  then  illustrates  the  work  of  God,  which  he  had  just  begun  among 
the  Samaritans,  by  a  similitude*  from  the  face  of  Nature  before  them. 
Glancing,  on  the  one  side,  at  the  peasants  scattered  over  the  fertile 
valley,  busily  sowing  their  seed,  and,  on  the  other,  at  the  Samaritans, 
thronging  from  the  town  in  answer  to  the  woman's  call,  he  says  to  the 
disciples,  "Are  ye  not  wont  to  say,  at  this  season  of  the  year,  *  There  arc 
yet  four  vionths,  and  then  cometh  harvest  ?'t  So  it  is,  indeed,  in  the 
natural,  but  not  in  the  spiritual  world.  The  seed  is  just  sown,  and 
already  the  har\'cst  apjiears.  '  Lift  up  yoiir  eyes'  (pointing  to  the  ap- 
proaching Samaritans),  '  a7id  see  how  the  fields  are  already  ivhitening  to 
the  harvest.^  " 

"  This  Bimilitude  is  of  tlie  same  character  with  Christ's  parables  i^ven  in  the  first  three 
(lospels  in  general,  and  especially  with  those  taken  from  sowing  seed,  iVc. ;  a  sign  of  tlie 
common  character  that  pei-vaded  all  his  discourses. 

t  A  proverb  taien  from  the  climate  and  farming  of  that  part  of  the  country. 


THE  NOBLEMAN'S  SON.  185 

A  profound  glance  into  the  soul  of  Christ  and  the  secret  connexion 
of  his  thoughts  is  now  opened  to  us.*  He  cannot  utter  this  prediction 
of  the  glorious  harvest  that  is  to  follow  the  seed  which  he  has  sown, 
without  the  mournful,  though  pleasant,  thought  that  he  shall  not  live  to 
see  its  gathering.  He  must  leave  the  earth  before  the  harvest-home ; 
nay,  his  death  itself  is  to  prepare  the  way  for  it.  So  he  tells  his  dis- 
ciples that  they  shall  reap  what  he  had  sowed  ;  but  that  he  shall  rejoice 
with  them  ["  That  both  he  that  soxoeth  and  he  that  reapeth  may  rejoice 
together.  I  sent  you  to  reap  that  tvhereon  ye  bestowed  no  labotir"'\.\ 
Distant  intimations  like  this  were  the  only  announcements  of  his  ap- 
proaching death  that  Christ  made  at  this  early  period  of  his  ministry.^ 

§  126.  Subsequent  State  of  the  Sa?naritans. 
At  the  earnest  request  of  the  Samaritans,  who  were  deeply  impressed 
with  his  appearance  and  his  words,  Christ  remained  two  days  with 
them  before  continuing  his  journey  to  Galilee.  We  have  no  informa- 
tion as  to  the  immediate  fi-uit  of  these  his  first  labours  among  that  peo- 
ple ;  perhaps  it  was  the  source  of  that  religious  awakening  among 
them  which  is  recorded  in  the  Acts  (viii.,  14).  If  this  be  so,  the  seed 
sown  by  Christ,  rich  and  fruitful  as  it  was  in  the  short  time  of  his  stay, 
was  not  afterward  carefully  cultivated  until  the  Apostles  went  to  Sa- 
maria ;  many  foi-eign  elements  had  crept  in,  and  enthusiasts  and  false 
prophets  had  led  the  people  astray.  The  pure  manifestation  of  Di- 
vinity was  followed  by  a  paltry  caricature.  The  unsophisticated  Sa- 
maritans believed  in  Christ,  from  the  Divine  power  of  his  words  and  his 
appearance,  without  any  miracle ;  but  at  a  later  period,  when  their 
minds  had  been  debauched  by  magical  arts  and  legerdemain,  the  most 
striking  miracles  were  requisite  to  restore  them. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

CHRIST'S  FIRST  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

§  127.   Christ  heals  the  Nobleman^s  Son. —  Chooses  Capernaum  for  his 
Abode. — Healing  of  Peter^s  Wife^s  Mother. 

ON  his  arrival  in  Galilee  Jesus  went  again  to  Cana.     (John,  iv.,  46.) 
While  there,  there  came  to  him  a  man  belonging  to  the  court 

*  A  mark  of  trath,  not  of  fiction. 

t  There  is  no  ground  wliatever  to  refer  John,  iv.,  37,  38  (as  Strauss  does)  especially  to 
the  later  ministry  of  the  Apostles  in  Samaria.  The  prediction  which  they  contain  is  just 
like  those  in  Matt.,  x.,  26;  Luke,  xii.,  3;  and  in  the  parables  hereafter  examined  (p.  188- 
190).  Any  one  putting  these  words  into  Clirist's  mouth,  in  order  to  point  to  the  labours  of 
the  Apostles  in  Samaria  as  having  been  preceded  by  Christ's,  would  have  been  less  re- 
served and  delicate  about  it  by  far.  +  Luke,  v.,  35. 


186  FIRST  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

{liaaiALKoc;)  of  Herod  Antipas,  and  begged  him  to  go  down  to  C;iper- 
iiaura  and  cure  his  son,  who  was  dangerously  ill.  Distress  drove  this 
man  to  Christ ;  although  he  might  (if  he  had  chosen),  perhaps,  have 
received  Divine  impressions  before.  He  probably  was,  at  first,  among 
the  number  of  those  who  verified  the  proverb  in  regard  to  Christ,  "  a 
prophet  is  without  honour  in  his  own  country."  The  Samaritans  be- 
lieved, because  of  their  imvard  wants,  and  of  the  inward  power  of 
Divinity ;  the  faith  of  the  Galileans  had  to  be  roused  by  visible  mira- 
cles and  material  blessings.  To  this  must  we  refer  the  words  of  re- 
proof uttered  by  Christ  before  he  granted  the  man's  prayer :  "  Exccjd 
yc  see  signs  and  loonders,  ye  iv'dl  not  hclicve.'''*' 

Having,  by  the  miracle  wrought  in  this  case,  produced  a  new  and 
favourable  impression  upon  the  public  mind  at  Capernaum,  he  chose 
that  place  as  the  seat  of  his  ministry.  Here  he  taught  in  the  syna- 
gogue, and  healed  the  sick.  It  happened  on  a  certain  Sabbath,  tliat 
when  he  left  the  synagogue  he  went,  attended  by  his  disciples,  to  the 
house  in  which  Peter  lived,  with  his  motlier-in-law,  who  lay  ill  at  the 
time  of  a  fever.t  Jesus  healed  her,  at  once  and  fully,  so  that  she  was 
able  to  attend  to  her  household  duties  and  detain  her  guests  for  the 
Sabbath-day's  diiiuer.|  As  Christ  spent  the  day  in  the  house  (the  ru- 
mour having  probably  been  spread  that  he  would  soon  leave  tlie  town), 
sick  persons  were  brought  in  from  all  sides ;  not,  however,  until  after 
sunset,  to  avoid  breaking  the  law  of  the  Sabbath.  On  the  next  day 
the  people  strove  to  prevent  his  departure,  but  he  told  them,  "  /  must 
2'reach  the  kingdom  of  God  to  other  cities  also,  for  therefore  am  I  sent.''' 

§  128.  Christ  appears  in  the  Synagogue  at  Nazareth. — His  Life  is  En- 
dangercd.     (Luke,  iv.,  16-30.) 

From  Capernaum  Christ  went  to  Nazareth,  but  the  fame  of  his  great 
deeds  at  the  former  place  had  gone  before  him.  All  eyes  were  turned 
upon  him  when  he  appeared  in  the  synagogue  on  the  Sabbath  ;  they 
had  known  him  as  a  very  different  person  from  what  fame  now  pro- 
claimed him  to  be.  He  took  the  scroll  of  the  prophets  that  was  hand- 
ed to  him,  and.  Divinely  guided,  opened  it  at  Isaiah,  Ixi.,  1.  We  may 
infer  from  the  words  of  this  passage  that  he  proclaimed  the  arrival  of 
the  prophetical  Jubilee,  and  declared  himself  to  be  the  promised  one 
that  was  to  open  the  eyes  of  the  blind,  and  to  bring  liberty  to  those 
who  languished  in  the  bondage  of  sin  and  Satan. 

But  his  hearers  were  unconscious  of  their  spiritual  bondage,  and 
longed  for  no  deliverance  ;  they  knew  not  of  their  blindness,  and  askeil 
not  to  be  healed.     Engrossed  in  the  affairs  of  life,  they  were  conscious 

*  See  p.  138.  t  Luke,  iv.,  38;  Matt.,  viii.,  14;  Mark,  i.,  20, 

X  Joseph.,   De  Vita  Sua.,  ^  51  :   "Iktyj  wpa,  k<iO'  ;;i'  toiS  odtidaaiv  iipiaTovouiaOat  ivinndv  tartp 


NAZARETH.  187 

of  no  higher  wants,  and,  therefore,  although  his  words  made  an  im- 
pression, it  was  only  upon  the  surface.  Their  astonishment  that  a  man 
whom  they  had  known  from  childhood  should  speak  such  words  of 
power  was  soon  followed  by  the  doubt,  "  How  comes  it  that  such 
a  man  should  do  such  great  things  1"  Incapable  of  appreciating 
the  heavenly  gifts  which  Christ  offered,  they  wished  him  (in  their 
hearts,  if  not  with  their  lips)  to  work  wonders  there,  as  he  had  done  at 
Capernaum. 

We  have  seen  already*  that  the  fundamental  principles  on  which 
Christ  acted  forbade  him  to  accept  a  challenge  of  this  sort.  He  could 
do  nothing  for  those  who  insisted  on  seeing  in  order  to  believe.  Slaves 
to  the  outward  seeming,  and  destitute  of  a  spiritual  sense,  they  would 
have  been  satisfied  with  nothing  he  might  do  ;  and  he  refused  them 
with  a  rebuke  that  pointed  to  the  ground  of  their  offence  and  unbelief: 
"  Ye  will  surely  say  unto  mc  t/iis  froverh,  '■Physician,  heal  thyself;^ 
whatsoever  we  have  heard  done  i?i  Capernaum,  do  also  here  in  thy  cotin- 
tryP  He  then  quoted,  with  special  reference  to  Nazareth,  the  proverb 
which  he  had,  on  another  occasion,  applied  to  the  whole  of  Galilee, 
*'  A  prophet  is  without  honour  in  his  own  country  ;"t  and  illustrated,  by 
examples  from  the  Old  Testament  (in  opposition  to  their  contracted  ai'- 
rogance),  the  truth  that  the  grace  of  God,  in  the  distribution  and  ap- 
plication of  miraculous  gifts,  s.gX.s,  freely  ;  so  that  they  could  not  extort 
a  miracle  by  their  challenge,  if  it  was  the  will  of  God  that  none  should 
be  wrought.     He  came  by  no  means  to  heal  all  the  Jewish  nation. 

At  this  rebuke  the  wrath  of  the  scribes  and  of  the  rude  multitude 
was  enkindled  against  him,|  and  the  protecting  hand  of  God  alone 
saved  him  from  the  death  which  threatened  him. 

This  rejection  of  Christ  at  Nazareth,  due  mainly  to  the  disposition 
of  the  chief  men,  is  worthy  of  note  as  a  type  of  the  rejection  which 

*  See  p.  136. 

t  The  Nazarenes  represent  the  character  of  the  whole  Jewish  people.  The  doctrine 
which  Christ  arrayed  against  them — that  God's  gi-ace  is  not  imparted  according  to  any 
human  standard — contains  the  germ  of  Paul's  ninth  chapter  to  the  liomans,  which  meets 
similar  Jewish  demands. 

X  Lvike's  account  of  this  is  very  graphic,  but  very  brief;  many  other  things  may  have  occur- 
red to  stir  up  the  anger  of  the  people.  But  when  we  remember  the  fame  that  had  preceded 
his  coming,  the  stinking  exordium  with  which  he  opened  his  speech  (addressed,  however, 
only  to  susceptible  souls),  and,  finally,  that,  instead  of  complying  with  their  request,  he  i-e- 
fused  and  rebuked  them  at  the  same  time,  we  may  readily  conceive  why  they  should  be 
angry  at  the  "  son  of  the  carpenter,"  now  coming  forward  with  the  pretensions  of  a  prophet. 
Their  excited  selfishness  now  took  the  garb  of  zeal  against  a  false  prophet.  According  to 
Luke's  account,  Christ  wrought  no  miracle  here,  and  this  accords  with  the  words  he  ut- 
tered;  the  less  detailed  statements  of  the  other  Evangelists  (Matt.,  xiii.,  .58;  Mark,  vi.,  5) 
imply  that  he  wrought  a.  few.  In  this  last  case,  it  might  be  supposed  that  he  did  not  leave 
the  town  immediately  after  the  synagogue  sei-vice,  and  that,  meanwhile,  something  occur- 
red to  excite  the  people.  It  is  probable,  however,  that  we  must  consider  Luke's  statement 
the  most  definite,  both  in  view  of  the  general  principles  on  which  Clirist  wrought  his 
mighty  worlis,  and  also  of  tlie  special  relation  in  which  he  stood  to  the  Nazarenes. 


158  FIRST  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

awaited  him  at  the  hands  of  the  leaders  of  the  whole  nation  from  the 
same  cause. 

5  129.  TJie  Parahle  of  the  Soicer.* — Chrisi's  Explanation  of  the  Para- 
ble to  the  smaller  Circle  of  his  Disciples. 

The  time  inter\'ening  between  Christ's  return  to  Galilee  in  Novem- 
ber, and  his  journey  to  Jerusalem  to  attend  the  feast  of  the  Passover 
in  the  following  Mai'ch  or  April,  was  spent  in  scattering  the  seeds  of 
the  kingdom  more  widely  among  the  people  of  that  country.  Probably 
many  of  the  events  recorded  by  the  first  three  Evangelists  belono-  to 
this  period. 

Perhaps,  also,  it  was  during  this  period  that  he  took  occasion,  as  he 
walked  by  the  shores  of  Genesareth,  to  offer  Divine  truth  to  the 
gathered  crowds  around  him,  in  the  form  of  a  parable  suggested  by 
the  labours  of  the  peasants  who  were  sowing  their  fields  around.  He 
exhibited  vividly  to  their  minds,  under  the  figure  of  the  seed,  the  object 
of  his  proclamation,  the  dispositions  of  mind  with  which  it  must  be  re- 
ceived in  order  to  accomplish  that  object,  and  the  hindrances  with 
which  it  is  wont  to  meet  in  human  nature. 

It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  Christ  uttered  this  parable  (which  refers 
solely  to  the  operations  of  the  word  proclaimed  by  him)  as  an  isolated 
speech  ;  indeed,  it  is  distinctly  intimated  (Mark,  iv.,  2)  that  an  exhorta- 
tion or  warning  to  his  hearers  preceded  it. 

He  divides  his  hearers  into  two  principal  classes,  (L)  those  in  whom 
the  word  received  is  unfruitful,  and  (H.)  those  in  whom  it  brings  forth 
fruit.  In  the  first  class,  again,  he  distinguishes  [a)  the  totally  unsus- 
ceptible, and  [b)  those  to  whom  the  word,  indeed,  finds  access,  but  yet 
brings  forth  no  fruit.     Of  these  last,  again,  there  are  two  subdivisions. 

I.   The   Unfruitful    Hearers. 
[a.)    The  totally  Unsusceptible. 
The  seed,  which  does  not  penetrate  the  earth  at  all,  but  remains 
upon  the  surface,  and  is  trodden  or  devoured  by  birds,  correspontls  to 
the  relation  of  the  Divine  word  to  the  wholly  worldly,  who,  utterly  un- 
susceptible, reject  the  truth  without  ever  comprehending  it  at  all. 

(b.)  The  2^(H'tialhj  Suscejjtible. 
(1.)  The  Stony-ground  Hearers. — Under  the  figure  of  the  stony 
ground,  in  which  the  seed  shoots  up  quickly,  but  withers  as  soon,  for 
want  of  earth  and  moisture,  he  depicts  that  lively  but  shallow  suscepti- 
bility of  spirit  which  grasps  the  truth  eagerly,  but  receives  no  deep  im- 
pressions, and  yields  as  quickly  to  the  reaction  of  worldly  temptations 
as  it  had  yielded  to  the  Divine  word.     Faith  must  prove  itself  in  strife 

*  Matt.,  xiii.,  1-9 ;  Mark,  iv.,  1-9  ;  Luke,  viii.,  4-8. 


PARABLE  OF  THE  SOWEE.  1S9 

against  the  world  without,  as  well  as  within ;  but  the  mind  just  de- 
scribed never  appi-opriates  the  truth  in  such  a  way  as  to  obtain  power 
to  resist. 

(2.)  The  Word  CkoJced  among  Thorns. — The  seed  which  germinates 
and  takes  root,  but  is  stifled  by  the  thorns  that  shoot  up  with  it,  figures 
the  mind  in  which  the  impure  elements  of  worldly  desire  develope 
themselves  along  with  the  higher  life,  and  at  last  become  strong  enough 
to  crush  it,  so  that  the  received  truth  is  utterly  lost. 

II.  The   Fruitful   Hearers. 

When  seed  is  sown  into  good  ground,  it  is  variously  productive  ac- 
cording to  the  fertility  of  the  soil.  So  the  fruitfulness  of  Divine  truth, 
when  once  appropriated,  depends  upon  the  degree  in  which  it  pene- 
trates the  whole  interior  life  and  all  the  powers  of  the  spirit,  stamping 
itself  upon  the  truth-inspired  course  of  life. 

With  what  perfect  simplicity  are  the  profoundest  truths  in  regard  to 
the  growth  of  religious  life  unfolded  in  this  parable  !  So  vivid  an  im- 
pression was  made  upon  a  woman  in  the  throng,  that  she  exclaimed, 
"Blessed  is  the  womh  that  hare  thee,  and  the  breast  that  gave  thee  suck."* 
But  Christ  rejected  this  external  veneration,  and  said,  as  if  with  pro- 
phetic warning  against  that  tendency  to  fix  religious  feeling  upon  the 
outward,  which  in  later  times  so  sadly  disfigured  true  Christianity, 
"i\^o,  rather  ble.ised  are  they  that  hear  the  word  of  God  and  keep  it ;" 
with  obvious  reference  to  the  parable,  which  illustrated  the  faithful  re- 
ception and  use  of  the  Divine  word. 

After  the  dispersion  of  the  multitude,  the  smaller  circle  of  disciples 
gathered  about  Christ  and  asked  a  further  explanation  of  the  parable.t 
He  told  them  that  to  them  it  should  remain  no  longer  a  parable  ;|  tlici/ 
might  clearly  apprehend  the  truth  which  was  only  offered  in  a  veil  to 
the  stupid  multitude.  After  unfolding  its  import,  he  taught  them  that 
the  truth  then  veiled  in  parables  was  to  become  a  light  for  all  man- 
kind ;  that  they  were  to  train  themselves  to  be  his  organs  in  diffusing  it ; 
but  that,  in  order  to  this,  they  must  ever  grow  in  the  knowledge  of  his 
truth  by  a  faithful  employment  of  the  means  that  he  had  given  them.  "iVb 
man,  when  he  hath  lighted  a  candle,  covcreth  it  with  a  vessel,  or  putteth 
it  under  a  bench  ;  but  setteth  it  on  a  candlestick,  that  they  which  enter  in 
may  see  the  light.  (So,  also,  the  truth,  destined  to  be  a  light  for  all 
mankind,  must  not  be  concealed,  but  diffuse  its  light  on  all  that  seek  to 
enter  the  kingdom  of  God.)  For  there  is  nothing  hid  that  shall  not  be 
known  and  come  abi-oad.     (And  he  adds  wamingly  to  his  disciples), 

*  Luke,  xi.,  27.  We  shall  give  our  reasons,  further  on,  in  placing  these  words  in  this 
connexion.  t  Matt.,  xiii.,  18-23;  Mark,  iv.,  10-25;  Luke,  viii.,  9-18.  X  Cf.  p.  105. 


100  FIRST  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

Take  heed,  therefore,  how  ye  hear ;  for  ivhoxoever  hath,  to  h'nn  shall  he 
given  ;  and  whosoever  hath  not,  from  him  shall  be  taken  even  that  which 
he  SEEMETU  to  have.  (Every  thing  depends  upon  the  spirit  in  which 
the  truth  is  received  and  put  to  use.)" 

§  130.  Parable  of  the  various  Kinds  of  Fish  in  the  Net.*- — Of  the 
Wheat  and  the  Tares.j 

Marvellous  was  the  spirit-glance  with  which  Christ  surveyed  not  only 
the  process  by  which  the  higher  life  which  he  had  introduced  into  hu- 
manity was  to  develope  itself,  according  to  its  own  inherent  laws,  but 
also  the  manifold  corruptions  and  hindrances  that  awaited  it.  The  par- 
ables in  which  he  illustrated  the  hindrances  and  obstacles  of  the  truth 
were  also  derived  from  the  sphere  of  nature  and  of  life  immediately 
around  him — the  toils  of  the  fishermen  in  the  Sea  of  Genesareth,  and 
of  the  husbandmen  in  the  fertile  fields  about  its  shores. 

He  had  to  teach  his  disciples  that  not  all  who  joined  him  were  fitted 
to  be  genuine  followers,  and  that  the  spurious  and  the  true  should  be 
intermixed  in  his  visible  kingdom,  until  that  final  process  of  decision 
which  God  had  reserved  to  himself.  To  convey  this  truth,  he  com- 
pares the  kingdom  of  God,  in  the  process  of  its  developcment  on 
earth  (which  corresponds  to  the  visible  Church  as  distinguished  from 
the  invisible),  to  a  net  cast  into  the  sea,  in  which  fish  of  all  kinds,  trood 
and  worthless,  are  caught,  and  which  are  only  assorted  after  the  net 
has  been  drawn  to  the  shore. 

It  was,  perhaps,  an  expression  of  surprise  on  the  part  of  his  disri- 
j)les,  at  the  long  forbearance  of  Christ  toward  some  whom  they  deemed 
unworthy — and  certainly  there  was  one  such  in  the  immediate  circle  of 
his  fi>llowers — that  gave  him  occasion  to  utter  the  parable  of  the 
"  Wheat  and  the  Tares."  Its  object  was  to  warn  them  (and  the  lead- 
ers of  the  Church  in  all  ages)  against  arbitrarily  and  impatiently  an- 
ticipating the  Divine  wisdom,  which  guides  all  the  threads  of  t!;e 
(Jhurch's  progress  to  one  aim;  against  attempting  to  distinguish  the 
spurious  from  the  genuine  members  before  that  final  sifting  of  the  king- 
dom which  God  himself  will  make ;  to  teach  them  that  men  have  no 
means  of  making  such  decisions  unerringly,  and  might  cut  oR',  as  false, 
some  who  were,  or  might  become,  true  subjects  of  the  kingdom. 

The  chief  point  in  the  parable  is,  that  while  the  genuine  seed  ger- 
minates and  brings  forth  fruit,  the  bastard  seed  is  also  sown  among  it, 
and  both  shooting  up  together,  the  bastard  wheat,  from  its  likeness  to 
the  true,  cannot  well  be  discriminated  imtil  harvest,  when  its  real  na- 
ture is  manifested.  The  other  point  of  comparison  is  the  impatience 
of  the  servants,  who  wish  to  pull  up  the  tares  at  once. 

"  Matt.,  xiii.,  47.  t  Matt.,  xiii.,  21. 


THE  STORxM  SUBDUED.  191 

It  is  a  question  whether  the  individual  trait  that  the  tares  were  sown 
by  the  enemy  "■  wJiile  men  slcpV  had  any  special  prominence.  If  so, 
it  contains  an  exhortation  to  the  leaders  of  the  Church  to  be  watchful ; 
implying  that  carelessness  and  indifference  on  their  part  may  admit 
false  members  among  the  true.  But  no  such  exhortation  is  afterward 
expressed,  and,  moreover,  the  whole  plan  of  the  parable  presupposes 
that  these  spurious  admixtures  will  nccessarlhj  take  place  in  the  procu- 
ress of  the  kingdom ;  that  no  care  or  foresight  can  prevent  them. 
We  must,  therefore,  consider  this  trait  as  belonging  to  the  colourino' 
rather  than  the  substance  of  the  parable. 

§  131.  Christ  subdues  a  Storm  on  the  Sea. —  Character  of  the  Act  as  a 
JSIiracIe. — Its  moral  Significance. 

The  disciples  had  many  opportunities,  on  the  Sea  of  Genesareth,  of 
contrasting  their  own  spiritual  feebleness  with  the  calmness  of  the  Sav- 
iour's soul ;  an  experience  that  was  useful,  not  only  at  the  time,  but 
as  a  preparation  for  their  own  subsequent  calling. 

On  one  occasion,*  sailing  from  the  western  to  the  eastern  shore  of 
the  sea,  in  a  vessel  with  a  number  of  his  disciples  and  others,  he  sunk 
into  sleep,  probably  worn  out  with  his  previous  labours  in  supplying 
the  physical  as  well  as  spiritual  necessities  of  the  jjeople.  While  he 
was  asleep,  a  storm  arose,  so  violent  as  to  threaten  the  destruction  of 
the  vessel.  The  disciples,  full  of  consternation,  and  always  accustomed 
to  seek  his  aid  in  distress,  now  roused  him  from  sleep.  In  a  few  short 
words  he  commands  the  winds  and  the  waves  to  "  be  still,"  and  is 
obeyed  ;  a  calm  is  spread  over  the  face  of  nature.  He  mildly  rebukes 
the  disciples  :  "  Where  is  your  faith  1  what  sort  of  trust  in  God  is  this, 
which  can  so  easily  be  shaken  V 

Not  only  the  disciples,  but  the  other  persons  in  the  ship,  were  deeply 
impressed  by  this  miracle.  One  of  the  strangerst  (for  the  disciples  had 
seen  too  many  of  his  wonders  to  ask  such  a  question)  exclaimed. 
"  What  kind  of  man  is  this,  that  even  the  elements  obey  him." 

The  question  has  been  started  whether  this  occurrence  cannot  be  ex- 
plained from  the  subjective  apprehension  of  the  men  themselves,  e.g., 
as  follows.  When  Jesus  awoke,  and  spoke  calmly  to  them,  his  com- 
posure quieted  their  perturbed  minds.  A  calm  in  the  elements  en- 
sued ;  and  they  transferred  the  impression  made  upon  their  minds  to 
Nature.  Interpreting  the  few  words  uttered  by  Christ  in  this  way, 
they  involuntarily  altered  them  a  shade  in  repeating  them  afterward. 

*  Luke,  viii.,  22-25;  Matt,  viii.,  23-27;  Mark,  iv.,  36-41.  The  connexion  of  this  history 
with  that  of  the  Gadarene  in  the  text  of  the  Evangelists  is  a  proof  of  historical  reality ; 
DO  causal  ground  of  such  a  connexion  exists. 

t  The  expression  oi  ai/OpwToi,  in  Matt.,  indicates  that  these  persons  were  not  disciples. 


192  FIRST  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

Now,  even  if  this  theory  were  admitted,  it  would  leave  the  Divine 
image  of  Christ  untouched  in  its  sublimity.  He  that,  on  awaking  sud- 
denly from  sleep,  could  impress  men's  minds  with  such  a  belief,  by 
a  word  and  a  glance,  must  have  been  the  Son  of  God. 

But  the  theory  cannot  be  admitted.  Christ  must  have  known  that 
the  observers  looked  upon  his  words  as  the  cause  of  the  calm  that  en- 
sued, and  would  not  have  employed  a  deceit  to  confirm  their  faith  in 
his  sovereignty,  which,  resting  upon  the  foundations  of  truth,  needed 
no  such  props  as  this.  He  would  rather  have  taken  occasion,  from 
such  a  misunderstanding  (had  it  occurred),  to  convey  a  useful  lesson  to 
his  future  Apostles.  He  would  have  told  them,  probably,  that  his 
work  was,  not  to  subdue  the  storms  and  waves  of  nature,  but  of  men's 
souls;  that  to  souls  full  of  his  peace  and  joy  no  powers  of  the  world 
could  bring  terror. 

In  short,  our  interpretation  of  the  event  will  depend  upon  the  general 
view  of  the  person  of  Christ  with  which  we  set  out.  Were  an  achieve- 
ment like  this  attributed  to  a  saint,  we  should  be  entitled  to  give  it 
such  an  interpretation  as  the  above  ;  but  it  is  ascribed  to  Jesus,  the  Son 
of  God,  who  revealed,  in  the  history  which  we  have  of  his  life,  powers 
adequate  to  such  a  deed. 

The  moral  design  of  the  miracle  was,  partly,  to  impress  his  sover- 
eignty upon  the  minds  of  certain  persons  who  had  before  seen  no 
exhibitions  of  it ;  and,  partly,  to  confirm  the  faith  of  the  Apostles  in  his 
power  to  subjugate  nature,  and  make  her  operations  tributary  to  the 
kintrdom  of  God.  And  this  sensible  miracle  was  an  image  of  that 
higher  spiritual  one  which  Christ  works  in  all  ages,  in  speaking  peace 
to  the  soul  amid  all  the  tempests  of  life,  and  in  bringing  to  obedience 
all  the  raging  powers  that  oppose  the  progi-ess  of  his  kingdom. 

§  132.  The  Gadarcne  Demoniac* —  Chris  fs  Treatment  of  him  after  tiic 
Cure. — Inferences  from  it. 
Christ  landed  on  the  eastern  shore,  near  the  town  of  Gadara.  IMnny 
pagans  probably  resided  in  that  vicinity,  as  herds  of  swine  abounded. 
A  demoniac, t  who  could  not  possibly  be  kept  chained  in  his  raging 
paroxysms,  but  constantly  broke  his  fetters  and  eluded  his  guardians, 
was  wandering  about  near  the  landing-place.  He  believed  himself  in- 
habited and  hurried  hither  and  thither  by  a  host  of  evil  spirits.  Driven 
naked  from  the  haunts  of  men  by  the  direful  powers,  he  sought  a 
dreary  refuge  amid  the  grave-stones  and  old  tombs|  of  the  wilderness. 

•  Matt.,  viii.,  28 ;  Mark,  v.,  1-BO  ;  Luke,  viii.,  26-39.  Two  demoniacs  are  mentioned  by 
Matthew,  perhaps  because  the  demoniac  speaks  in  the  plural  number.  t  Cf.  p.  145. 

X  These  are  still  to  be  found  among  the  ruins  of  Ovi-Kcis,  probably  the  ancient  Gadara. 
(Cf  Burckhardt,  i.,  426;  Gesenius,  Anmerknngen,  538 ;  Robinson,  iii.,  53.').)  Origen  mast 
Lave  been  mistaken  (t.  vi.,  in  Joann.,  $  24)  iii  sayiog  that  Gadara  could  not  be  tiie  spot. 


THE  GADARENE  DEMONIAC.  193 

Pi'obably  attracted  by  the  noise  of  the  landing,  the  demoniac  ran  to 
meet  the  passengers  as  they  disembarked ;  having  probably,  also,  heard 
of  the  fame  of  Jesus,  which  had  spread  from  the  western  to  the  eastern 
shore  of  the  lake.  From  what  we  can  learn,  we  should  judge  that  the 
man  was  a  heathen,  who  had,  however,  dwelt  much  among  the  Jews, 
and  therefore  confounded  Jewish  and  pagan  notions  together  in  his  dis- 
turbed consciousness.  So  he  proba'bly  addressed  Jesus  as  "  the  son 
of  the  highest  Cxod,"  rather  in  a  pagan  than  Jewish  sense.*  The  ap- 
pearance of  Christ  (probably  combined  with  what  he  had  previously 
heard)  affected  him  profoundly;  the  warring  powers  within  him — as 
was  generally  the  case  when  Christ's  Divinity  came  in  contact  with 
demoniacs — j^artly  urged  him  toward  the  Saviour,  and  partly  held  him 
back  ;  attracted  as  he  was,  he  could  not  bear  the  presence  of  Jesus. 
There  is  something  in  him  which  resists  and  dreads  the  Divine  power. 
Losing  his  proper  identity  in  that  of  the  evil  spirits  that  possess  him, 
he  personates  them,  and  recognizing,  with  ten-or,  the  Son  of  God  as 
the  future  Judge,  he  exclaims,  in  anguish,  "  What  hast  thou  to  do  with 
us,  thou  Son  of  the  Highest "?  (What  would  the  Heavenly,  so  near  us  1) 
Why  hast  thou  come  hither  before  the  time  (before  the  final  doom),  to 
make  us  feel  thy  power,  and  torment  us?"t 

Christ's  first  procedure  is  not  such  as  to  imply  that  he  has  to  do  with 
evil  spirits.  He  directs  his  words  to  the  man,  seeks  to  get  his  atten- 
tion and  draw  him  into  conversation,  so  as  to  pi-epare  the  way  for 
further  influences.  As  a  beginning,  he  asks  the  man  his  name.  But 
the  demoniac,  still  blending  his  own  identity  with  that  of  the  evil 
spirits,  answers,  "Legion;"  it  is  a  whole  legion  of  evil  spirits  that 
dwell  in  him.  He  then  reiterates,  in  their  person,  the  prayer  that 
Christ  would  not  cast  them  into  Hades  before  their  time ;  and  per- 
ceiving a  hei'd  of  swine  feeding  at  a  distance,  the  unclean  spirits  are 
associated  with  the  unclean  beasts  in  his  perturbed  thoughts.  He  then 
beseeches  Christ  that,  if  the  spirits  are  compelled  to  leave  the  man, 
they  may  be  permitted  to  enter  the  stoinc,  under  the  notion  that  they 
cannot  exist  except  as  united  to  material  bodies. 

There  is  a  gap  here  in  our  connexion  of  the  facts.  Did  Christ  really 
participate  in  the  opinions  of  the  demoniac,  or  was  it  only  subsequently 
inferred,|  from  the  fact  that  the  swine  rushed  down,  that  Christ  had 

because  there  is  neither  lake  nor  precipice  near;  he  probably  looked  for  the  theatre  of  the 
event  in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  the  tovirn,  which  by  no  means  follows,  necessarily  from 
the  narrative.  *  Cf.  the  words  of  the  heathen  woman,  Acts,  xvi     17. 

t  The  original  form  of  these  words  is  probably  that  given  by  Matthew.  Every  thing 
leads  us  to  conclude  that  the  demoniac,  impressed  by  the  person  of  Christ,  addressed  him 
first. 

i  Sti-ikingly  as  this  graphic  nairative  bears  the  marks  of  truth,  this  is  still  its  obscure 
point.  Some  have  attempted  to  clear  it  up  by  the  supposition  that  the  demoniac  threw 
himself  upon  the  herd  after  Christ  spoke  to  him.    But  this  is  inconsistent  with  the  facts 

N 


194  FIRST  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

allowed  the  evil  spirits  to  take  possession  of  them  ]  It  is  certain,  at 
any  rate,  that  they  did  cast  themselves  over  the  precipice  into  the  sou, 
as  if  diHven  by  an  invisible  power,  and  that  many  of  them  perished. 

One  thing  is  very  clear,  a  man  in  such  a  state  could  not  have  been 
cured  by  Christ's  merely  humouring  his  whims,  and  by  a  single  coinci- 
dence like  that  of  the  herd's  throwing  themselves  over  the  precipice. 
Nay,  he  could  not  have  made  the  request  that  he  did,  nor  have  be- 
lieved that  the  evil  spirits  had  abandoned  him  at  Christ's  command,  had 
not  Christ,  by  the  power  of  his  spirit,  made  a  mighty  impression  upon 
liim  before.  What  followed  shows,  however,  more  clearly  that  Christ 
used  higher  influences  to  restore  his  shattered  soul  to  its  pristine  sound- 
ness. 

Although  no  detailed  account  is  left  of  what  immediately  followed, 
we  may  yet  conclude,  from  the  result,  that  many  things  occuried  be- 
tween Christ  and  the  demoniac  after  the  preparatory  work  above  re- 
lated. His  heart  had  been  made  susceptible  of  farther  spiritual  influ- 
ences. The  presence  and  words  of  Christ  produced  additional  effects, 
as  we  find  the  man  sitting  clothed,  and  in  his  right  mind,  at  the  feet  of 
Jesus,  listening  to  him  with  eager  devotion.  So  moved  is  he,  that  ho 
wishes  to  attach  himself  to  Christ  and  follow  him  every  where. 

But  Christ  (who  had  reserved  for  a  subsequent  period  the  conver- 
sion of  the  heathen)  tells  the  restored  man  to  '■'go  home  to  Jiis  friends.'''* 
We  see  in  this,  as  in  many  other  examples,  how  Christ's  conduct  va- 
ried with  circumstances,  and  how  carefully  we  should  guard  against 
deducing  general  principles  from  his  procedure  in  isolated  cases. 
While  he  calls  upon  some  to  leave  home  and  family  to  follow  him,  he 
bids  this  man  to  follow  first  the  purely  human  feelings  which  had  been 
reinstated  in  their  natural  rights  within  him;  to  return,  sane  and  calm, 
to  the  family  which  he  had  abandoned  as  a  maniac  ;  and  to  glorify  Gon 
among  them,  by  telling  them  how  Christ  had  wrought  the  mighty 
change,  and  giving  them  a  living  2)roof  of  it  in  his  own  person.  He 
tells  some  on  whom  he  had  wrought  miracles  not  to  say  too  much 
about  what  he  had  done  ;  but  this  one  he  commands  to  publish  every 

It  is  not  probable  that  a  paroxysm  like  this  could  have  seized  him  after  the  impression 
which  Clirist  had  made  upon  him.  Moreover,  this  explanation  allbrds  no  ijround  for  tlu- 
notion  of  the  demoniac  that  the  spirits  had  abandoned  him  for  the  swine,  but  would  ratln'r 
convince  him  of  the  continuance  of  their  power  over  him.  In  order  to  believe  the  fornicr. 
lie  must  have  stood  as  a  (luiet  spectator  while  the  herd  was  violently  driven  into  tlie  sea 
by  au  invisible  power.  The  analogy  of  the  notions  of  the  time  favours  this.  In  the  refer- 
ence to  Josephus.  before  made  (p.  150),  the  exorcist  bids  the  demon  leave  the  sufferer  ur.d 
enter  a  vessel  of  water  that  stood  by  ;  and  his  obedience  is  proved  by  the  fall  of  the  vessel 
ui iln  own  accord.  So  the  swine  must  have  rushed  down  of  their  own  accord,  to  allbrd  nuy 
proof  that  the  devils  had  left  the  man  and  entered  them.  Finally,  an  attack  of  the  swine, 
on  the  part  of  the  demoniac,  could  have  been  uo  matter  of  surprise  to  the  swineherds. 
(Matt.,  viii.,  37.)  *  Mai-k,  v.  19. 


THE  ISSUE  OF  BLOOD.  195 

where  among  his  friends  what  great  things  God  had  wrought  for  him. 
In  this  case  it  was  heathens  (not  Jews)  that  were  concerned. 

The  way  in  which  Christ  gave  peace  and  harmony  to  this  distracted 
and  lacerated  soul  affords  an  image  of  the  whole  work  of  redemption. 
The  first  emotion  of  the  uncultivated  and  (chiefly)  heathen  people 
around  was  fear ;  not  the  feeling  then  best  adapted  to  render  them 
susceptible  of  his  teaching.  But  the  simple  story  of  the  restored  man's 
experience  was  adapted  to  lead  them  to  contemplate  Christ,  no  longer 
on  the  side  of  his  power,  but  of  his  love  and  holiness.* 

§  133.    Christ  Returns  to  the  tcest  side  of  Gencsarcth . — Healing  of  the 

Issue  of  Blood.\ 

When  Christ  returned  to  the  western  shore  of  the  lake,  he  found  a 
multitude  of  people  awaiting  his  arrival.  One  of  the  I'ulers  of  the 
synagogue,  named  Jairus,  whose  daughter  of  twelve  years|  lay  so  ill 
that  her  death  was  hourly  expected,  pressed  through  the  throng  to  the 
Saviour,  and  besought  him  to  go  to  his  house.  He  arose  to  grant  the 
sorrowing  father's  prayer,  but  the  crowd  detained  them. 

A  woman  who  had  suffered  with  an  issue  for  twelve  years,  and  had 
sought  aid  in  vain  from  physicians,  approached  him  through  the  press 
from  behind.  She  did  not  venture  to  address  him  directly,  but  having 
formed  the  idea  in  her  own  way,  she  thought  that  a  sort  of  magical 
healing  power  streamed  forth  from  his  person,  and  that  she  might  be 
7'elieved  of  her  malady  simply  by  touching  his  garment.  Her  believ- 
ing confidence,  although  blended  with  erroneous  conceptions,  was  not 
disappointed. 

Christ  felt  that  some  one  had  touched  his  robe,§  and  inquired  who 
it  was.  Peter,  forward  as  usual,  spoke  for  the  disciples,  and  said 
(very  candidly,  doubtless,  as  he  probably  did  not  observe  the  woman's 
movement),  "  How  canst  thou  be  surprised,  in  the  midst  of  such  a 
throng,  that  the  people  approach  and  touch  thee  !"  But  Christ  re- 
peated his  question,  and  the  woman,  who  had  not  before  ventured  a 
word,  expecting  to  be  discovered,  fell  trembling  at  his  feet,  and  pro- 

*  The  narrative  does  not  say  whether  this  foundation  of  Divine  knowledge  was  ever 
built  «pou  among  them.  t  Matt.,  ix.,  18-26;  Mark,  v.,  21;  Luke,  viij.,  40. 

I  Strauss  .sajs  that  this  age  of  "twelve"  was  a  mere  fiction,  in  imitation  of  the  twelve 
years  of  the  issue  of  blood.  There  is  not  a  shadow  of  reason  to  suppose  that  Luke's  state- 
ments are  not  literally  correct  in  both  instances ;  but  even  if  they  were  not,  if  a  round 
number  only  is  meant,  and  the  one  period  modelled  after  the  other,  the  veracity  of  the  nar 
rative  would  be  in  nowise  impeached. 

§  Luke's  account  could  have  been  given  by  none  but  an  eye-witness  in  such  lively  and 
minute  detail ;  e.  g.,  Christ's  question,  Peter's  answer,  the  repetition  of  the  question,  etc. 
Moreover,  Luke  makes  the  cure  immediate  upon  the  touching  of  the  garment ;  in  Matthew 
it  follows  the  words  of  Christ  in  the  usual  way.  Luke's  eye-witness  had  the  conception 
of  the  mode  of  cure  that  the  woman  herself  had,  and  so  interpreted  Ciirist's  words 
(viii.,  46). 


196  FIRST  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

claimed  before  all  what  had  happened  to  her.  Jesus,  kindly  encoura- 
ging the  trembling  heart,  said  to  her,  "  Be  of  good  cheer,  tJiy  faith  hath 
saved  thee  ;  go  in  peace ."* 

§  134.    Raising   of  Jairus's  Daughter. — And  of  the  Widow^s  Son   at 

Nain. 

In  the  mean  time  a  message  came  from  the  house  of  Jairus  that  his 
daughter  was  dead,  and  that,  as  nothing  could  be  done,  the  Master  need 
be  troubled  no  further.t  But  Christ,  not  hindered  by  the  news,  said 
to  the  father,  "  Be  not  afraid ;  only  believe,  and  she  shall  he  made 
whole  J"* 

What  right  had  he  to  hold  out  this  hope  to  the  parent,  and  in  what 
sense  did  he  do  it  ]  Did  lie  know,  from  the  reported  symptoms,  that 
the  death  was  only  apparent,  and  that  he  was  going  to  cure  a  fainting- 
fit by  remedies  in  his  possession  ]  Had  this  been  the  case,  he  surely 
would  have  guarded  against  exciting  hopes  that  might  be  disappointed  ; 
he  would  have  said,  in  words,  that  his  expectations  were  founded  only 
on  the  supposition  that  the  girl  was  in  a  trance ;  and  as  natural  signs 
alone  could  give  no  unening  certainty  of  cure,  he  would,  in  mere 
prudence,  have  spoken  conditionally,  telling  the  father,  perhaps,  to 
trust  in  God,  but  yet,  at  the  same  time,  to  resign  himself  to  tlie  Divine 
will.  In  a  word,  he  could  only  have  spoken  as  he  did,  from  a  Divine 
confidence  that  he  could,  by  the  power  of  God  within  him,  restore  life 
to  the  dead  body. 

At  the  door  of  the  house  the  mother  comes  to  meet  them.  A  throng 
of  curious  persons  at  the  door  desire  to  enter,  but  he  admits  only  \he 
parents,  with  three  of  his  most  intimate  disciples.  In  the  chamber  of 
death  he  finds  already  gathered  the  minstrels  and  mourners.  "  Weep 
not,"  said  he  to  them  ;  "  she  is  not  dead,  hut  sleepcth." 

These  words  might  have  been  used,  it  is  true,  if  he  meant  (as  some 
suppose)  to  state  her  condition  according  to  the  symptoms,  and  to 
make  this  a  ground  of  consolation;  as  if  he  had  said,  "she  is  only  in  a 
trance  resembling  sleep."     But  they  were  equally  appropi-iate,  if,  with- 

*  The  narrative  does  not  decide  whether  the  approacli  of  the  woman  was  known  to 
dirist,  and  he  healed  her  intentionally,  or  whether  the  cure  was  a  Divine  operation,  inde- 
pendently of  him  (a  physical  cause  being  laid  out  of  tlie  case),  caused  by  the  woman's  faitli, 
and  thus  serving  to  glorify  her  trust  in  Christ. 

t  The  discrepancy  between  Luke's  account  (viii.,  49)  and  Matthew's  (ix.,  18,  seq.)  has 
been  made  a  ground  of  objection.  It  has  been  supposed  that  the  second  message  is  a  mere 
filling  up  of  Luke's.  A  similar  discrepancy,  as  to  the  sending  of  a  message,  occurs  in  tlio 
case  of  the  centurion,  Matt.,  viii.,  5-10;  Luke,  vii.,  (i.  Grant  that  the  two  cases  were 
entirely  alike,  it  would  not  follow  that  there  had  been  an  intentional  invention.  But  the 
dissimilarity  of  the  two  is  greater  than  their  similarity.  In  both  cases,  indeed,  the  mes- 
sage is,  that  Christ  iiecd  not  come;  but  the  reason  assigned  in  the  one  is,  that  he  can  help 
withovt  cominif,  and  in  the  other,  that  it  is  too  late  for  him  to  help  at  all.  What,  then,  is 
unlikely  in  either?  especially  as  Luke's  statements,  derived  from  eye-witnesses,  are  full, 
while  those  of  Matthew  are  abridged  reports. 


JAIRUS'S  DAUGHTER.  197 

out  any  reference  to  natural  symptoms  and  consequences,  lie  meant 
only  to  say  that  this  condition  would  he,  for  her,  only  sleep,  as  he  was 
able  to  raise  her  out  of  it.  The  character  in  which  Christ  acted,  as 
well  as  the  whole  connexion  of  the  narrative,  compel  the  conclusion 
that  he  spoke  with  I'eference  to  the  result  rather  than  to  the  nature  of 
the  condition  in  which  the  maiden  lay ;  even  though  the  circumstances 
might  make  it  probable  that  this  condition  was  a  trance. 

["And  he  put  them  all  out'^\  In  stillness  must  such  a  woi'k  be 
wrought ! 

When  the  noisy  mourners  were  gone,  and  he  was  alone  with  the  few 
that  had  accompanied  him  into  the  chamber  of  death,  he  spoke  to  the 
maiden  the  life-inspiring  words.  He  then  •*  charged  them  to  tell  no 
man  what  had  been  dcme."  It  has  been  said  that  he  did  this  to  pre- 
vent their  giving  him  the  false  reputation  of  having  done  a  miracle  in 
the  case ;  false,  because  he  had  restored  the  maiden,  in  an  entirely 
natural  way,  from  a  death  that  was  only  apparent.  Had  this  been  the 
case,  he  certainly  would  have  explained  himself  more  definitely.  He 
would  have  told  them,  "in  that  case,  Jiow  to  report  the  matter  ;  not  that 
they  should  not  report  it  at  all.  But  he  could  not  have  wished  that 
the  event  should  be  otherwise  regarded  than  as  a  work  of  Divine 
power ;  and  the  prohibition  was  doubtless  made  in  view  of  circum- 
stances, especially  in  view  of  the  dispositions  of  the  people. 

To  this  period  of  Christ's  ministry,  probably,  belongs  also  a  miracle 
akin  to^he  raising  of  Jairus's  daughter,  which  is  reported  only  by  Luke.* 

On  a  journey,  accompanied  by  his  disciples,  and  by  many  others  who 
had  joined  him  on  the  road,  he  arrives  before  the  little  town  of  iVa/«,t 
in  the  vicinity  of  Mount  Tabor,  and  not  far  from  the  well-known  Endor. 
Near  the  gate  he  meets  a  funeral  procession ;  and  in  the  sad  line  a 
widow,  mourning  for  her  only  son.     In  compassion^  to  her  grief,  he 

*  Lake,  vii.,  11. 

t  Now  a  little  village,  Nein,  inhabited  by  a  few  families. — RobiiiMJi,  iii.,  460  [Am.  ed., 
iii.,  218,  2-26]. 

t  Ohhmisen  thiiiks  that,  although  Christ  only  made  his  compassion  for  the  mother  prom- 
inent in  this  miracle,  he  still  had  regard  to  the  salvation  of  the  son  ;  for,  as  he  well  remai-ks, 
the  life  of  one  human  being  cannot  be  used  merely  as  means  for  another's  peace  or  wel 
fare.  But,  although  we  cannot  decide  that  Christ  had  reference  at  the  time  to  the  manner 
in  which  the  youth's  resurrection  would  teud  to  his  personal  welfare,  he  must  have  been 
satisfied  that,  in  the  wisdom  of  God,  it  was  destined  to  secure  it.  As  the  organ  of  God, 
lie  must  have  been  conscious  of  a  harmony  between — not  merely  his  whole  manifestation, 
but  also — all  his  individual  actions  and  the  Divine  plan  for  the  government  of  the  world. 
A  physician  may  save  a  man's  life  by  natural  means  without  Itnowiug,  at  the  time,  what 
use  the  man  will  make  of  it;  bat,  if  he  is  a  believer,  he  must  be  satisfied  that  God  would 
not  allow  it,  if  the  restoration  were  not  for  die  best,  in  regard  to  his  individual  well-beint;. 
The  same  relation  would  subsist  if  the  means  employed  were  supernatural. 


198  FIRST  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

exclaims,  "  Weep  not."  Had  he  not  been  conscious  of  power  to  remove 
the  cause  of  grief,  by  giving  bade  her  son,  he  would  have  tried  to 
soothe  her  sorrow,  instead  of  exciting  a  vain  hope,  only  to  plunge  her 
deeper  into  anguish. 

§  135.  Doubts  of  John  the  Baptist  in  his  Imprisonment* — His  Message 

to  Chriat,  and  its  Result. — Christ'' s  Testimony  concerning  Hiin. — His 

vleiv  of  the  relation  hetwccn  the  Old  and  New  Dispensations. 

John  the  Baptist  had  now  languished  in  prison  for  several  months  in 

the  fortress  Machosrus.     He  was  not  wholly  interdicted  from  intercourse 

with  his  disciples  ;  for  the  fear  of  political  disturbance  from  him  was,  as 

we  have  seen,t  the  ostensible,  not  the  real,  reason  of  his  imprisonment. 

In  the  testimony  which  he  gave  to  Christ,  just  before  his  imprison- 

ment,t  he  had  declared  his  expectation  that  he  would  soon  be  obscured 

by  the  public  manifestation  of  Jesus  as  Messiah,  and  by  his  recognition 

at  the  hands  of  the  worthy  members  of  the  Theocratic  nation.     What 

he  heard  in  prison  of  Christ's  mighty  works  only  made  him  look  more 

impatiently  for  the  founding  of  his  visible  Messianic  kingdom.     The 

delay  of  this  event  might  very  naturally  cause  doubts  to  spring  up  in 

his  mind.§     But  as  his  faith  in  the  Divine  calling  of  Jesus  remained 

unshaken,  he  looked  for  a  definite  decision  of  the  question  from  his 

own  lips,  and  sent  two  of  his  disciples  with  the  inquiry,  "  Art  thou  He 

that  should  come,  or  do  we  loohfor  another  .?"|| 

In  this  reply  Christ  gives  them,  as  proof  of  his  Messiahship,  the 
miracles  that  he  had  wrought,  both  upon  matter  and  spirit.^  He  first 
combines  the  two  classes,  applying  the  material  as  a  ty2ie  or  image  of 
the  spii'itual ;  and  then  makes  the  spiritual  especially  proliinent. 
"  The  blind  receive  their  sight"  (both  physical  and  spiritual),  "  the  lame 
tcalk**  the  lepers  are  cleansed,  the  deaf  hear,  the  dead  are  raised,]]  the 
poor  have  the  Gospel  preached  unto  them."W 

*  Matt.,  xi.,  2-15  ;  Luke,  vii.,  19-30.  t  Cf.  p.  179.  %  Cf.  p.  178.  §  Cf.  p.  5S. 

II  We  have  before  sliown  that  this  presupposes  rather  thati  contradicts  the  previous 
baptism  and  recognition  of  Jesus  by  the  Baptist.  It  illustrates,  however,  the  methoii 
in  which  the  synoptical  Gospels  were  compiled :  the  author  of  this  statement,  if  he  liad 
known  of  that  previous  recognition,  could  hardly  have  failed  to  notice  it. 

IT  It  by  no  means  follows,  from  the  narrative,  that  Christ  wrought  all  these  miracles  in 
presence  of  John's  messengers.  They  could  hear  of  them  any  where,  and  see  their  effects. 
Nor  is  a  chronological  connexion  between  the  resun-ection  of  the  widow's  son  and  this 
message  of  John's  to  be  inferred  from  the  juxtaposition  in  which  Luke  places  them  ;  he 
may  have  been  led  to  this  by  Christ's  mention  of  "the  raising  of  the  dead." 

**"  There  is  an  obvious  allusion  here  to  Isa.,  xxxv.,  5;  Ixi.,  1 ;  yet  it  is  not  absolutely  ne- 
cessary 80  to  consider  it.  Nor  are  we  bound  to  square  the  words  of  Christ  by  tlie  quota- 
tion, and  to  infur  that  all  which  deviates  from  it  has  been  added  by  another  hand.  A  close 
connexion  is  obvious  in  the  text. 

tt  This  is  to  be  understood  especially  of  spiritual  death  and  resurrection,  a  sense  which 
joins  better  to  the  following  clause,  since  it  is  precisely  by  the  "preaching  of  the  Gospel" 
that  the  spiritually  dead  are  raised. 

tt  The  word  "poor"  may  be  taken  in  th.e  sjiii-itual  as  well  as  the  natural  sense  here; 


JOHN  THE  BAPTIST.  199 

Thus  he  presents  himself  as  the  Messiah,  selecting  the  sphere  of  his 
labours  among  the  poor  in  goods  and  in  spirit,  displaying  his  relieving 
and  redeeming  power  to  those  who  feel  their  need  of  it ;  the  self-re- 
vealing, yet  self-concealing  Messiah,  who  does  not  offer  himself  as 
Theocratic  king  visibly  before  men's  senses,  as  the  Jews  expected — 
an  expectation  which  perplexed  even  the  Baptist's  own  mind.  And, 
therefore,  he  closes  with  the  pregnant  words  of  warning,  "  And  blessed 
is  he  whosoever  shall  not  be  offended  in  me."  (Happy  is  he  who  is  sat- 
isfied, by  these  signs,  to  admit  my  Messiahship,  and  who  is  not  offend- 
ed because  it  does  not  precisely  meet  his  expectations.) 

After  the  disciples  of  John  had  departed,  Jesus  said  to  the  multi- 
tude around  him,  "  What  went  ye  out  into  the  wilderness*  to  see  ?  A 
reed  shaken  with  the  wind  on  the  shore  of  Jordan  V  To  see  a  fickle, 
changeful  man,  the  sport  of  outward  influences  ]  (He  thus  intends  to 
represent  John  as  a  prophet,  faithful  and  true  to  his  convictions,  and 
to  vindicate  him  from  any  charge  of  instability  on  the  ground  that  this 
question,  sent  by  his  disciples,  was  in  conflict  with  his  earlier  testimo- 
nies.) "  But  perhaps  ye  went  out  to  see  a  man  in  soft  and  splendid 
garments  ?  Such  men  ye  find  not  in  deserts,  but  in  the  palaces  of 
kings."  A  striking  contrast  between  the  preacher  of  repentance,  the 
austere  censor  of  morals,  and  the  luxurious  courtiers  who  wait  upon 
the  smiles  of  princes.t 

After  these  negative  traits,  Christ  designates  the  stand-point  of  John 
positively.  He  calls  him  a  "  prophet,"  and  "  more  than  a  prophet," 
and  points  him  out  as  the  Forerunner,  the  preacher  of  repentance  pre- 
dicted in  Malachi  (iii.,  1),  who  was  to  go  before,  in  the  spirit  of  Elias, 
and  prepare  the  way  for  the  Messiah.  He  declares  that  none,  in  all 
time  before,  had  held  a  higher  position  in  the  developement  of  the 
kingdom  of  God  than  John  ;  that  none  had  enjoyed  a  higher  degree  of 
religious  illumination.^  Yet,  said  he,  the  least  in  the  manifested  king- 
both,  indeed,  are  connected,  as  it  is  among  the  poor  in  worldly  goods  that  most  of  the 
spiritually  poor  are  to  be  found,  i.  e.,  such  as  feel  their  inward  wants  and  crave  a  supply 
for  them. 

*  It  is  possible  that  these  words  had  no  higher  meaning,  and  were  only  used  to  impress 
the  single  thought  negatively,  thus :  "  Ye  must  have  gone  to  the  icilderness  to  seek  some- 
thing more  than  the  wilderness  itself  could  afford  to  you."  But  as  all  that  follows  refers 
antithetically  to  John,  we  infer  that  these  words  also  had  such  a  reference. 

t  Unless  the  words  have  this  meaning,  they  appear  to  have  none ;  with  it,  they  imply 
that  John's  conduct  had  given  occasion  for  such  comparisons  ;  and  perhaps  this  may  have 
contributed  to  his  imprisonment. 

J  We  cannot,  in  Matt,  xi.,  11,  supply  vpv'i>l,Tt)i  after  nnl,i,)v  ;  the  last  clause  of  the  verse 
forbids  it.  It  probably  was  not  in  Christ's  original  words  ;  and  if  it  be  not  a  gloss  in  Luke 
(vii.,  28),  it  is  only  an  explanatoiy  addition  in  the  statement  itself  The  "  superiority"  does 
not  refer  to  subjective  moral  worth,  in  which,  certainlj',  Christ  could  not  intend  to  place  the 
"least"  in  the  Christian  Church  above  this  man  of  (JoD  ;  but  refers  to  advantages  for  ap- 
prehending the  nature  and  progress  of  the  kingdom  of  God.    It  is  in  this  sense  that  the 


eoo  FISRT  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

tlom  of  God  (/.  e.,  in  the  Cluirch  foundeJ  by  Christ  as  Redeemer),  the 
least  among  truly  enlightened  Christians  is  greater  than  John. 

These  words  have  a  double  importance,  as  they  define  not  only 
Christ's  view  of  the  stand-point  of  John  the  Baptist,  but  also  of  the  Old 
Dispensation  in  general,  in  regard  to  Christianity. 

In  regard  to  the  first,  we  must  distinguish  wherein  John  was  behind 
Christianity,  and  wherein  he  towered  above  the  prophets.  He  was  be- 
hind Christianity,  because  he  was  yet  prejudiced  by  his  conception  of 
the  Theocracy  as  external  ;  because  he  did  not  clearly  know  that  Mes- 
siah was  to  found  his  kingdom  by  sufferings,  and  not  by  miraculously 
triumphing  over  his  foes ;  because  he  did  not  conceive  that  this  king- 
dom was  to  show  itself  from  the  first,  not  in  visible  appearing,  but  as 
a  Divine  power,  to  develope  itself  spiritually  from  within  outward,  and 
thus  gradually  to  overcome  and  take  possession  of  the  world.  The 
least  among  those  who  understand  the  nature  and  process  of  develope- 
ment  of  the  Divine  kingdom,  in  connexion  with  Christ's  redemption, 
is  in  this  respect  greater  than  the  Baptist,  who  stood  upon  the  dividing 
line  of  the  two  spiritual  eras.  But  John  was  above  the  projDhets  (and 
Christ  so  declared),  because  he  conceived  of  the  Messiah  and  his  king- 
dom in  a  higher  and  more  spiritual  sense  than  they  had  done,  and  be- 
cause he  directly  pointed  men  to  Christ,  and  recognized  Him  as  the 
manifested  Messiah. 

In  regard  to  the  second,  viz.,  the  relation  of  the  Old  Dispensation  in 
general  to  Christianity,  the  fact  that  Christ  places  the  Baptist  ahovc 
the  prophets,  who  were  the  very  culminatlng-point  of  the  Old  Cove- 
nant, and  yet  so  far  hcloio  the  members  of  the  new  developement  of  the 
kingdom,  exhibits  in  the  most  striking  way  possible  his  view  of  the  dis- 
tance between  the  old  preparatory  Testament  and  the  New.  The  au- 
thority of  Christ  himself,  therefore,  is  contradicted  by  those  who  ex- 
pect to  find  the  truth  revealed  by  him,  already  developed  in  the  Old 
Testament.  If  in  John  we  are  to  distinguish  the  fundamental  truth 
which  he  held,  and  which  pointed  to  the  New  Testament,  from  the  lim- 
ited and  sensuous  Jonn  in  which  he  held  it,  much  more,  according  to 
Christ's  words,  are  we  bound  to  do  this  in  the  Old  Testament  generally, 
and  in  its  Messianic  elements  especially.  Following  this  intimation, 
we  must,  in  studying  the  prophets,  discriminate  the  historical  from  the 
ideal  sense,  the  conscious  from  the  unconscious  prophecies. 

The  testimony  which  Christ  added  in  regard  to  the  effects  of  .Tohn's 
labours  corresponds  precisely  with  the  above  view  of  his  stand-point. 

greatest  of  the  oUl,  prcpartitory  stage  were  less  than  the  least  of  the  new.  Since  the 
prophets,  who  fonn  the  point  of  transition  between  the  two  dispensations,  occupied  tho 
highest  stand-point  in  thp  religious  developement  of  autiipiity,  the  sense  of  the  passage  is 
the  same,  with  or  without  the  word  -pv<pf)Trii. 


THE  EASY  YOKE.  201 

"  From  the  days  of  John  the  Baptist  until  now*  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
suffereth  violence,  and  the  violent  take  it  by  forced]  (Tliat  is,  "  the  long- 
ing for  the  kingdom,  excited  by  John's  preaching,  has  spread  among 
men  ;  they  press  forward,  striving  to  secure  it,  and  those  who  strive 
with  their  wlrole  souls  obtain  a  share  in  it.")  "  And  if  ye  will  receive 
it,  this  is  Elias,  ivhich  was  for  to  comeT  (John  is  the  Elias  who  was 
to  come  to  prepare  the  way  for  Messiah — if  you  will  only  understand 
it — spiritually,  not  corporeally.) 

§  136.   Christ  shows  the  Relation  of  his  Contemporaries  to  the  Baptist 

and  to  Himself  \ — The  Easy   Yoke  and  the  Light  Burden. — Jewish 

Legalism  contrasted  with  Christian  Liberty. 

The  discourse  which  Christ  continued  to  the  groups  around  him  is 
especially  important  as  unfolding  the  relation  in  which  he  stood  to  the 
Jews. 

"  They  are  like  children  sitting  in  the  market-place,  and  saying.  We 
have  piped  unto  you,  and  ye  have  not  danced  ;  tve  have  mourned  unto  you, 
and  ye  have  not  wept.'"'  The  merry  music  and  the  mournful  are  alike 
displeasing  ;  they  will  neithf:'r  dance  nor  be  sad.  So  it  was  with  John 
and  the  Son  of  Man  on  the  one  hand,  to  the  people  of  that  time  on  the 
other.  The  ascetic  of  the  desert,  preaching  repentance  with  fasting 
and  austerity,  was  laughed  at  as  a  madman  ;  the  Son  of  Man,  mingling 
in  the  intercourse  of  men,  and  sharing  in  their  human  joys,  was  "  a 
glutton  and  a  wine-bibher.''^  Yet  "  Wisdom  icas  justified  of  her  children^'' 
Was  recognized  by  those  who  really  belonged  to  her.  (While  the 
multitude,  sunk  in  worldly-mindedness  and  self-conceit,  and  deaf  to  the 
voice  of  Divine  wisdom,  took  offence,  for  opposite  reasons,  at  both 
these  messengers  of  God,  the  humble  and  susceptible  disciples  of  the 
wisdom  of  God,  on  the  other  hand,  could  understand  the  different  stand- 
points of  John  and  Jesus,  and  appreciate  the  reasons  for  their  different 
modes  of  life  and  action.) 

*  These  words  (Matt,  xi.,  12)  obviously  presuppose  that  John's  labours  had  ceased,  and, 
of  course,  that  he  had  lost  his  liberty.  This  is  enough  to  refute  the  hypothesis  of  iichleier- 
machcr,  that  he  sent  the  message  before  his  imprisonment.  The  whole  tenor  of  the  pas- 
sage implies  that  John's  era  was  at  an  end.  It  has  also  been  inferred  from  the  words 
atib  Tiiv  l]ncpii)v  'iuidi'vov,  that  tlie  passage  was  a  later  interpolation,  improperly  put  into 
Christ's  mouth.  If  this  were  true,  it  would  only  affect  the  form,  not  the  subslance  of  the 
passage,  and  we  should  have  to  follow  Luke,  svi.,  16  (where,  however,  the  words  are  ob- 
viously out  of  place).     But  it  is  not  tnie. 

t  These  words  are  expressly  chosen  to  denote  the  eaiTiest  will,  the  struggle,  and  the  en- 
tire devotion  of  soul  which  are  requisite  to  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  All  the 
powers  of  the  spirit,  its  submission,  its  efforts,  are  necessary  at  all  times,  to  secure  the 
kingdom  amid  the  reactions  of  the  natural  man,  the  carnal  mind,  its  selfishness,  its  world- 
liness  of  spirit ;  but  at  that  time  it  was  especially  the  worldly  notions  of  the  Messiahship 
that  had  to  be  struggled  against.  The  nature  of  the  case  shows  that  iii(t<^civ  is  to  be  thus 
figuratively  taken;  the  tisus  loquendl  does  not  contradict  it ;  and  it  suits  the  natural  con- 
nexion of  the  passage.  \  Matt.,  xi.,  17. 


202  FIRST  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

The  discourse  concluded  with  an  exhortation  to  the  gathered  multi- 
tude, in  which  Christ,  with  the  greatest  tenderness,  invited  the  suscep- 
tible souls  among  them  (the  children  of  Wisdom)  to  "  come  unto  hun,"* 
and  find,  in  his  fellowship,  a  supply  for  all  their  wants.  He  contrasts 
himself,  as  the  Redeemer  oi  "  heavy -ladc7i"  souls,  with  the  rigid  teach- 
ers of  the  law,  who,  while  they  burdened  men's  consciences  with  their 
multiplied  statutes,  imparted  no  power  to  perform  them,  and  repelled, 
in  haughtiness,  the  conscience-stricken  sinner,  instead  of  affording  him 
peace  and  consolation.  The  contrast,  perhaps,  was  intended  to  apply 
not  only  to  the  Pharisees,  but  to  the  Baptist,  who  also  occupied  the 
stand-point  of  the  law. 

Tlie  "friend  of  publicans  and  sinners"  thus  invites  all  who  feel  their 
wretchedness  to  enter  his  communion ;  and  announces  himself  as  the 
''  meek  and  lowly"  one,  repelling  none  because  of  their  misery,  con- 
descending to  the  necessities  of  all,  taking  off  the  load  from  the  weary 
soul  instead  of  imposing  new  burdens,  and  giving  them  joy  and  rest  in 
his  fellowship.  He  makes  no  extravagant,  impracticable  demands. 
Obedience,  indeed  ("  the  easy  yoke"),  he  does  require ;  but  an  obedi- 
ence which  (although  it  embraces  more  than  the  righteousness  of  i\w. 
law)  is  easy  and  pleasant,  flowing  spontaneously  from  the  Divine  lift; 
within,  and  rondered  in  the  spirit  of  love.  "  Come  unto  me  (says  he), 
all  ye  that  labour  and  are  heavy  laden  (all  that  sigh  under  the  legal 
yoke  and  the  sense  of  sin,  like  the  'poor  in  spirit'  of  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount),  and  I  will  free  you  from  your  burdens,  and  give  you  the  peace 
for  which  you  sigh.  Enter  the  fellowship  of  my  disciples,  and  you 
will  find  me  no  hard  master,  but  a  kind  and  gentle  one  ;  you  shall  ob- 
tain rest  for  your  souls,  for  my  yoke  is  mild,  and  the  burden  ^vllich  I 
shall  lay  upon  you,  light."f 

Our  inference,  from  Christ's  own  words,  in  respect  to  the  relation 
in  which  he  stood  at  that  time  to  the  Jewish  people,  is  :  That  the  ?na- 
jority  of  them  were  dissatisfied  with  him,  as  they  had  before  been  with 
the  Baptist ;  but  that  a  smaller  number  of  those  who  had  recognized 
the  Divine  calling  of  John,  acknowledged  also  that  of  Christ,  and 
passed  over,  in  submission  to  the  guidance  of  Divine  wisdom,  from  the 
former  to  the  latter. 

It  is  clear  that  a  strong  opposition  was  already  formed  against  Christ, 
and  the  chief  point  on  which  it  supported  itself  was  precisely  that 
which  distinguished  the  stand-point  of  the  Saviour  from  that  of  the 

*  These  inconiparnble  words,  preserved  for  us  by  Mattlicw  alone  (xi.,  28-30),  fitly  con- 
clude the  discourse  ;  the  interposed  passasi^e  (iO-27)  was  probably  taken  from  some  other 
of  Christ's  addresses  by  the  editor  of  our  Matthew  (see  hereafter),  and  placed  here  be- 
cause of  its  affinity  to  the  context. 

t  Here  is  the  gerrn  of  Paul's  entire  doctrine,  not  only  of  the  contrast  between  laic  and 
Gofpcl,  but  also  of  the  Gospel  itself  as  a  lo/ioj  nhTtws,  m'cviiaTos. 


FASTING.  203 

Old  Testament,  and  also  from  the  peculiar  one  of  John  the  Baptist.  It 
was  the  spirit  of  liberty  with  which,  in  Christianity,  the  Divine  life 
takes  hold  of  and  appropriates  to  itself  the  relations  of  the  world  and 
society,  in  contrast  with  the  spirit  of  ascetic  opposition  to  the  world. 
The  Jews  could  see  nothing  of  the  holy  prophet  in  a  man  who  shared 
with  his  disciples  in  the  pleasures  of  social  life,  and  sanctified  them 
by  his  presence ;  in  a  man  who  did  not  hesitate  to  partake  of  the  en- 
tertainments of  publicans  and  sinners.  Striking,  indeed,  must  have 
been  the  contrast  between  the  comparatively  unrestrained  mode  of  life 
adopted  by  Christ's  disciples,  and  the  austere  asceticism  of  the  pupils 
whom  the  Baptist  was  training  to  be  preachers  of  repentance,  or  of  the 
neophytes  of  the  Pharisaic  schools.  No  schools  of  spiritual  life,  in- 
deed, before  that  time,  had  trained  their  pupils  as  Christ  did  his.  We 
<"an  easily  imagine  the  amazement  of  the  Pharisees ! 

^  137.  C/irisi's  Conversation  with  the  Pharisees  in  regard  to  the  Mode 
of  Life  indulged  hy  his  Discij)les.* — The  Morality  of  Fasting. 

It  is  not  strange,  tlierefore,  that  on  a  certain  occasion  the  Pharisees 
came  to  Christ,  and  expressed  their  surprise  at  the  free  and  social 
mode  of  life  in  which  he  indulged  his  disciples.  They  did  not  confine 
their  appeal  to  the  example  of  their  own  school,  but  intentionally  add- 
ed that  of  the  Baptist's  disciples,  believing  that  the  latter  would  be 
the  more  to  their  purpose,  as  Christ  had  recognized  John  for  an  en- 
lightened teacher. 

It  may  be  asked  whether  the  Pharisees,  in  putting  this  question, 
sought  only  for  instruction,  and  wished  to  obtain  from  Christ  himself 
the  principles  on  which  a  course  so  inexplicable  to  them  was  founded, 
or  whether  they  ineant  to  reproach  him  personally  for  sitting  at  the 
banquets  of  publicans  and  sinners,  and  only  made  use  of  their  ques- 
tion about  the  disciples  for  a  crafty  blind  to  their  attack  ]  The  gentle 
and  instructive  tone  of  Christ's  reply  seems  (although  it  certainly  is 
not  proof)  to  favour  the  first  view.t  Would  he  have  said  so  much  to 
justify  his  conduct,  without  a  word  in  reproof  of  their  question,  if  he 
had  to  deal  with  crafty  opponents  utterly  unsusceptible  of  instruction  ?| 

*  Matt,  ix.,  11-17;  Mark,  ii.,  15-22;  Luke,  v.,  33-39. 

t  The  collocation  of  Luke,  v.,  33  and  34,  if  it  be  the  original  chronological  order,  opposes 
this  view.  lu  that  case,  after  Christ  had  caused  the  question  of  the  Pharisees  to  recoil 
upon  themselves,  they  retarned  with  it  in  a  more  concealed  form.  But  it  is  probable  [that 
different  classes  of  Pharisees  were  concerned  in  the  two  cases],  and  that,  this  distinction 
being  lost  sight  of,  the  occurrence  in  question  was  connected  with  one  of  the  real  machina- 
tions of  that  party  in  general  against  Christ. 

X  We  follow  Luke,  v.,  33  ;  Mark,  ii.,  18,  which  have  more  internal  probability  than 
Matt.,  ix.,  14.  It  is,  indeed,  possible  that  those  disciples  of  John  who  adhered  only  one- 
sidedly  to  the  views  of  their  master  may  have  taken  offence,  and  expressed  it,  just  as  the 
Pharisees  did.  Probably,  too,  at  a  later  period,  there  grew  up  a  gradual  opposition  be- 
tween the  Christians  and  part  of  John's  disciples  ;  and  the  Jewish  sect  of  I'lixcpoGavTiaTui 
may  have  been  no  other  than  these  {Hegesipp.  in  Euseb.,  iv.,  22.     Cf.  the  Clementines, 


204  FIRST  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

Be  that  as  it  may,  some  of  them  came  to  him  with  the  question, 
"  Why  do  the  disc'qdcs  of  John  fast  often,  and  make  prayers*  and  like- 
wise those  of  the  Pharisees  ;  hut  thine  eat  and  drink  ?"  Christ  replies  : 
"Can  you  make  the  companions  of  the  bridegi-oom  fast  while  the 
bridegroom  is  yet  with  them  ]  Does  fasting  harmonize  with  the  festal 
joy  of  a  wedding  ]  The  time  of  fasting,  indeed,  will  come  of  its  own 
accord,  when  the  bridegroom  is  gone,  and  the  festal  days  are  over." 

So  privations,  suited  to  the  time  of  mourning,  would  have  been  out  of 
keeping  with  the  joyous  life  in  common  of  the  disciples  and  their  Lord 
— with  those  happy  days  when  the  object  of  their  desire  was  yet  present 
in  their  midst.  Fasting  would  have  been  as  foreign  to  their  state  of 
mind — as  outward  and  as  forced — as  to  the  guests  at  a  wedding.  But  as 
the  days  of  the  feast  are  followed  by  others  when  fasting  is  in  place ; 
so,  when  the  joy  of  happy  intercourse  with  Christ  shall  give  place  to 
mourning  at  separation  from  Him  who  is  their  all  in  all,  in  those  sad 
days,  indeed,  the  disciples  will  need  no  outward  bidding  to  fast.  Their 
mode  of  life  will  naturally  change  with  their  state  of  feeling ;  fasting 
will  then  be  but  the  spontaneous  token  of  their  souls'  grief. 

Taken  in  this  sense,  it  is  clear  that  the  words  could  not  have  been 
intended  to  apply  to  the  whole  life  of  the  disciples  after  Christ  should 
have  been  i-emoved  from  them.  The  sad  feelings  here  desci'ibed  were 
not  intended  to  bo  permanent ;  the  transitory  pain  of  personal  separa- 
tion was  to  be  followed  by  a  more  perfect  joy  in  the  consciousness  of 
spiritual  communion  with  Christ.  Applying  the  passage,  then,  to  this 
transition  period  of  grief,  we  infer  from  it,  as  the  rule  of  Christian  eth- 
ics in  regard  to  fasting,  that  it  is  neither  enjoined  nor  recommended, 

Horn.,  ii.,  23,  'Iojum'?;?  liixipoBa-nTiaTiis.)  But  it  is  by  no  means  as  probable  that  they  joined 
themselves  with  the  Pharisees,  their  bitter  enemies  ;  they  could  have  had  no  tendency  to 
associate  with  men  whom  they  could  consider  as  having  had  a  hand,  at  least,  in  the  sacri- 
fice of  their  master.  The  fact  that  the  scribes  had  quoted  the  example  of  John's  disciples 
may  easily  have  passed  into  the  report  that  the  latter  had  come  to  Christ  with  the  same 
question.  This  view  is  adopted,  also,  by  Sckleiermackei:  De  WctLe's  objections  are  suffi- 
ciently refuted  by  what  has  been  said. 

*  l)c  Welte  considers  the  mention  of  "  prayer"  (Luke,  v.,  33)  as  out  of  place,  and  argues 
from  it  that  Luke  had  d(«iarted  from  the  original  tradition.  But  certainly  it  was  natural 
enough  for  the  Pharisees  thus  to  characterize  the  (to  them)  strikingly  worldly  life  of  the 
disciples  ;  for  the  fonner  made  a  show  of  sanctity,  not  only  by  fasting,  but  by  repeated 
l)rayers  ;  and,  moreover,  John  had  prescribed  afoi-m  of  prayer  for  his  disciples  (Luke,  xi., 
1),  which  Christ  as  yet  had  not  done.  As  the  words  "eating  and  drinking"  are  used  in 
the  question  to  designate  the  profane  and  carnal  life,  so  "fasting  and  fniyer'  denote  its 
opposite — the  strict  spiritual  life.  Now,  had  the  word  "  prayers"  originally  existed  in  the 
passage,  and  been  afterward  lust  in  transmission,  we  might  easily  account  for  it :  because 
it  might  be  thought  that  Christ's  reply  does  not  allude  to  "  prayer,"  that  such  a  depreciation 
of  prayer  (mistakenly  imagined)  would  be  a  stumbling-block,  and,  besides,  contradictory  to 
Christ's  own  teaching  in  other  places.  But  to  account  for  its  interpolation  is  (piite  a  dif- 
ferent matter.  As  for  Christ's  not  alludhig  to  prayer  in  his  reply,  he  had  no  call  to  do  it ; 
it  was  the  spirit  of  outward  and  ascetic  piety,  as  a  whole,  that  he  rebukes. 


NEW  WINE  IN  NEW  BOTTLES.  '205 

.out  only  justified,  as  tlie  natural  expression  of  certain  states  of  feeling 
analogous  to  those  of  the  disciples  in  the  time  of  sadness  referred  to  ; 
e.  g.,  the  sense  of  separation  from  Christ,  which  may  precede  an  expe- 
rience of  the  most  blissful  communion  with  Him.  In  such  states  of  the 
interior  life,  all  outward  signs  of  peace  and  joy,  all  participation  in  so- 
cial intercourse  and  pleasure  are  unnatural  and  repugnant  ;  although, 
when  Chi'ist  is  present  in  the  soul,  these  social  joys  are  sanctified  and 
transfigured  by  the  inward  communion  with  Him.  The  interior  life 
and  the  outward  expression  should  be  in  entire  harmony  with  each 
other.  Another  glance  at  this  subject,  however,  after  examining  what 
follows,  will  afford  us  another  view  of  it. 

§  138.  The  Parable  of  the  New  Patch  on  the  Old  Garment^  and  of  the 
New  Wine  in  Old  Bottles* 

Christ  added  another  illustration  in  the  form  of  a  parable.  "  No 
man  2>utteth  a  piece  of  a  new  garment  upon  an  old  ;  if  otherwise,  then 
both  the  new  maheth  a  rent,  and  the  piece  that  was  taken  out  of  tJie  neio 
agrecth  not  with  the  old.  And  no  man  putteth  neio  wine  into  old  bottles 
(skins),  else  the  new  tvine  will  burst  the  bottles  and  be  spilled,  and  the 
bottles  shall  perish.  But  new  ivine  must  be  put  into  new  bottles,  and  both 
are  preserved^ 

The  old  nature  cannot  be  renewed  by  the  imposition  from  without 
of  the  exercises  of  fasting  and  prayer ;  no  outward  and  compulsory 
asceticism  can  change  it.  Individual  points  of  character  are  significant 
only  so  far  as  they  are  connected  with  the  tendency  of  the  whole  life : 
a  reformation  in  these,  indeed,  may  be  enforced,  and  the  stamp  and 
spirit  of  the  life  remain  unchanged.  A  fragment  of  the  higher  spirit- 
ual life,  thus  broken  off"  from  its  living  connexion  (destroyed  in  the 
fracture),  and  forced  upon  the  nature  of  the  old  man,  would  not  really 
improve  it ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  by  its  utter  want  of  adaptation, 
would  worsen  the  rent  in  the  old  nature — would  tear  it  rudely  away 
from  its  natural  course  of  developement.  A  mere  renewal  from  with- 
out is  at  best  an  artificial,  hypocritical  thing.  The  new  cloth  is  torn, 
and  a  patch  laid  upcfti  the  old  that  does  not  fit  it.  The  new  wine  is 
lost,  and  the  old  skins  perish.t 

*  Matt.,  ix.,  16  ;  Mark,  ii.,  21  ;  Luke,  v.,  36. 

t  We  deviate  from  the  ordinary  interpretation  of  tins  parable.  Our  explanation  is  not 
only  adapted  to  the  preceding  context  (Luke,  v.,  33-35),  but  also  fits  the  minute  details  of 
the  comparison,  which  the  one  commonly  given  does  not.  According  to  the  latter,  the  sub- 
stance of  the  parable  is,  that  the  outward  religious  exercises  of  Judaism  are  not  adapted 
to  the  liigher  stage,  Christianity,  for  which  the  disciples  were  training.  But  Christ  admits 
(verse  3-5)  that  fasting  may  be  a  good  thing  at  the  right  time  ;  which,  he  said,  had  not  then 
come,  but  u-onhl  come.  Instead  of  taking  up  this  point,  and  unfolding  it  in  the  parable  in 
another  aspect,  as  one  might  expect,  the  common  interpretation  introduces  a  new  and  en- 
tirely different  thought,  viz.,  that  such  exercises  were  unsuitable  (not  to  their  condition  at 
thai  time,  but)  to  Christianity  at  any  time.     Again,  one  would  naturally  think,  from  v.  34, 


206  FIRST  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

The  premature  imposition,  therefore,  of  such  exercises  upon  the 
disciples,  instead  of  developing  the  new  life  within  them,  would  have 
hindered  it  by  mutilating  and  crippling  what  they  had.*  Separate 
branches  of  the  spiritual  life,  apart  from  their  connexion  with  the 
whole,  cannot  be  grafted  ujion  the  stem  of  the  old  nature ;  that  nature 
must  be  renewed  from  within  in  order  to  become  a  vessel  of  the  Spirit. 
(In  the  case  of  the  Apostles,  the  way  was  prepared  for  this  by  their 
personal  intercourse  with  the  Saviour.)  The  ichole  garment  had  to  be 
new;  the  wine  required  new  bottles.  The  new  Spirit  had  of  itself  to 
create  a  new  form  of  life. 

Glancing  back  from  this  point  to  the  words  before  spoken  on  fasting, 
we  may  refer  them  to  the  pi'ivations  that  lay  before  the  Apostles  in 
their  course  of  duty — privations  which  they  would  joyously  go  to  meet 
under  the  impulse  of  the  new  Spirit  that  was  to  animate  them. 

But  although  no  outward  impulses  (no  patches  upon  the  old  gar- 
ment) might  be  needed  when  the  interior  life  should  freely  guide,  it 
might  yet  naturally  be  the  case  that  "  No  man,  having  also  drank  uld 
wine,  straigliticay  dcsireth  ncio  ;  for,  he  saith,  the  old  is  lct.tcr.'"\  The 
disciples  had  to  be  weaned  gradually  from  the  old  life  and  trained  for 
the  new — a  law  applicable  in  all  ages  of  the  Church,  and  which,  if 
faithfully  observed,  might  have  saved  her  from  many  errors  in  Chris- 
tian life  and  morals.^ 

This  example  affords  another  illustration  of  the  truth  that  individual 

•T",  that  the  "  new  wine"'  and  the  "  new  cloth"  of  the  parable  were  intended  to  represent 
the  fasting,  &c.,  of  which  Christ  was  speaking,  viz.,  thai  fasting  which  the  Apostles  were 
to  practice  at  a  later  period.  But  the  usual  interpretation,  on  the  other  hand,  supposes 
fasting  to  be  something  defective  in  itself,  and  as  belonging  to  that  fonn  of  life  which  is  rej)- 
rcseuted  by  the  "  old  garment."  The  sense  thus  obtained  contains  a  thought  not  tnie  in 
itself;  for,  in  the  case  of  the  Apostles,  the  new  wine  of  Christianity  wan  put  into  the  old 
bottle  of  Judaism,  and  was  intended  to  break  it  to  pieces.  If  the  prescribed  fa.sting  was 
to  be  disregarded  by  the  Apostles  as  belonging  to  Jewish  legalism,  so  also,  on  the  same 
princi[)le,  the  whole  Jewish  legalism  would  have  to  be  done  away  by  them,  as  foreign  to 
the  new  spirit  introduced  by  Christ. 

It  is  remarkable  that  this  obviously  false  interpretation  should  have  kept  so  long  in  tlie 
back-ground  the  true  one  developed  by  Chrysostom,  Horn,  in  Matt.,  xxx.,  §  4.  Independ- 
ently of  my  exposition,  Wilke  has  recently  declared  himself  (in  his  Urcvangelisten)  in  favour 
of  the  view  here  given.  Dc  Wette  styles  it  "forced,"  but  how  the  tenn  can  apply  to  an  in- 
terpretation so  accurately  fitting  the  details  of  the  parable,  I  cannot  imagine.  1  should  he 
very  glad  to  see  the  attention  of  interpreters  directed  to  the  views  which  I  have  set  forth. 

*  Siiicentm  eit  nisi  vas,  qtiodrtinque  iiifuiulis,  acescit. 

t  It  is  a  proof  of  the  originality  and  faithfulness  of  Luke's  naiTative,  that  this  passage, 
so  indubitably  stamped  with  originality,  and  yet  so  closely  connected  witii  the  context,  is 
recorded  by  him  alone. 

X  Pojie  Innocent  HI.  understood  and  applied  this  passage  correctly,  in  reference  to  the 
establishment  of  a  mission  in  Prussia  :  "  Cum  veteres  uteres  vix  novum  viuum  contineant." 
Epp.,  1.  XV.,  M?. 


THE  LORD'S  PRAYER.  207 

parts  of  Christ's  teaching  cannot  be  rightly  understood  apart  from  their 
connexion  with  his  whole  system  of  truth. 

§  139.  Forms  of  Prayer. —  Tlic  Lord's  Traycr  ;   its  Occasion  and  Im- 
port*— Encouragements  to  Prayer  ;    God  gives  no  Sitonefor  Bread. 
We   take  up  now  a  subject  akin  to  that  of  which  we  have  just 
treated,  without  implying  (what,  indeed,  is  of  no  importance)  a  chrono- 
logical connexion  between  them. 

We  have  seen  that  one  thing  which  surprised  the  Pharisees  was  that 
Christ  did  not  lay  stress  upon  outward  prayers.  He  had  not,  like  John 
the  Baptist,  prescribed  forms  of  prayer  for  his  disciples.  In  this  re- 
spect, as  well  as  others,  their  religious  life  was  to  develope  itself  from 
within.  From  intercourse  with  Christ,  and  intuition  of  his  life,  they 
were  to  learn  how  to  pray.  The  mind  which  he  imparted  was  to 
make  prayer  indispensable  to  them,  and  to  teach  them  how  to  pray 
aright. 

On  a  certain  occasion,  the  desire  arose  in  their  hearts,  from  be- 
holding him  pray,  to  be  able  to  pray  as  he  did  ;  and  one  of  them  asked, 
"  Lord,  teach  us  liow  to  fray,  as  John  also  taught  his  disciples.^'f 

Christ  replied  that  they  were  not,  in  their  prayers,  to  use  "  many 
words,"  and  to  repeat  details  to  God,  who  knew  all  their  wants  before 
they  could  be  uttered.  And  then,  in  a  prayer  framed  in  the  spirit  of 
this  injunction,  he  gave  them  a  vivid  illustration  of  the  nature  of  Chris- 
tian prayer,  as  referring  to  the  one  thing  needful,  and  incorporating 
every  thing  else  with  that.  As  prayer  is  no  isolated  thing  in  Christi- 
anity, but  springs  from  the  ground  of  the  whole  spiritual  life,  so  t/us 
prayer,  w^hich  forms  a  complete  and  organic  whole,  comprehends  witli- 
in  itself  the  entire  peculiar  essence  of  Christianity. 

"  Our  Father  icho  art  in   Heavcn.'''\      The  form  of  the  invocation 

^  Luke,  xi. 

t  We  follow  Luke,  xi.  The  passage  in  Matt.,  vi..  7-16,  appears  foreign  to  the  original 
organism  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  in  which  prayer,  fasting,  &c.,  were  treated  cspt-- 
cially  in  contrast  vnlh  the  hypocrisy  of  the  Pharisees.  As  that  longer  discourse  was  made 
a  repertory  for  Christ's  sayings,  in  which  they  were  arranged  according  to  their  affinities, 
so  perhaps  it  was  with  this.  We  may  certainly  conclude  that  Christ  would  not  have 
sketched  such  a  prayer  for  the  disciples  without  a  special  occasion  for  it ;  for  the  wish  to 
lay  down  forms  of  prayer  was,  as  we  have  seen,  remote  from  his  spirit  and  ohject.  But 
we  cannot  think  it  possible  [with  some]  that  Christ  uttered  this  prayer  as  appropriate  for 
himself,  and  that  the  disciples  adopted  it  for  that  reason  ;  it  had  no  fitness  to  his  position : 
he,  at  least,  could  not  have  prayed  for  the  pardon  of  his  sins.  The  occasion  given  by  Luke 
v/as  a  very  appropriate  one  ;  the  form  was  drawn  out  by  Christ  at  the  request  of  the  dis- 
ciples. It  was  probable,  moreover,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  that  Christ,  who  did  not 
wish  to  prescribe  standing  forms  of  prayer,  would  make  use  of  such  an  occasion  to  explain 
further  the  nature  of  prayer  itself  [as  he  does  in  Luke,  xi.,  5-13].  In  tlie  Sermon  on  the 
Mount,  also  (Matt.,  vii.,  7),  a  passage  similar  [to  Luke,  xi.,  9]  is  found;  and  Matt.,  vi.,  7, 
jierhaps  contains  the  beginning  of  Christ's  reply  to  his  disciples'  request  on  the  subject. 

}  In  the  shorter  form  of  the  prayer  given  in  Luke,  the  words  hu(ov  and  "  o  tv  ro'ii  oif  avals' 


203  FIRST  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

corresponds  to  the  nature  of  the  Christian  stand-point ;  our  Father, 
because  Christ  has  made  us  his  children.  We  address  God  thus,  not 
as  individuals,  but,  in  the  fellowship  of  Christ,  as  members  of  a  com- 
munity which  He  has  placed  in  this  relation  to  the  common  Father. 
Side  by  side  with  this  consciousness  of  communion  as  children  goes 
that  of  our  distance  as  creatures ;  the  God  that  dwells  in  his  children 
is  the  God  above  the  roorld  (so  that  Christianity  is  equally  far  from 
Pantheism  and  Deism).  "  Our  Father — in  heaven''' — that  the  soul  may 
soar  in  prayer  from  earth  to  heaven,  with  the  living  and  abiding  con- 
sciousness that  earth  and  heaven  are  no  more  kept  asunder.  To  this, 
indeed,  the  substaiice  of  the  whole  prayer  tends. 

"  Hallowed  he  thy  name  ;  thy  kingdom  come  ;  thy  will  he  done  on 
earth  as  it  is  done  in  heaven."  While  the  Christian,  dwelling  on  eaith, 
where  sin  reigns,  prays  to  the  Father  in  heaven,  he  longs  that  earth  may 
be  completely  reconciled  to  heaven,  and  become  wholly  an  organ  of  its 
revelations.  And  this  is  nothing  else  but  the  coming  of  the  ki.vg- 
DOM  OF  God,  to  which,  as  the  centre  of  all  Christian  life,  and  the  ob- 
ject of  all  Christian  desire,  the  three  positive  prayers  first  given  di- 
rectly refer.  The  special  prayer,  "  Thy  kingdom  come"  is  guarded 
against  the  possibly  carnal  and  worldly  interpretation  (to  which  the  dis- 
ciples were  at  that  time  inclined)  by  the  one  which  precedes  ("  Hal- 
lowed he  thy  name"),  and  the  one  which  follows  ("  Thy  ivill  he  done"). 
The  Holy  One  is  to  be  acknowledged  and  worshipped  by  all,  accord- 
ing to  His  holy  nature  and  His  holy  name  ;*  not  by  a  nakedly  abstract 
knowledge  and  confession  thereof,  but  by  a  life  allied  to  Him.  This 
"  hallowing"  of  the  name  of  God  implies  the  "  coming  of  his  kingdom." 
and  this  last  is  further  developed  in  the  prayer  that  "  his  will  may  be 
realized  on  earth,  as  it  is  in  the  communion  of  perfect  spirits."  The 
kinrrdom  tvill  have  come  when  the  will  of  men  is  made  perfectly  at 
one  with  the  will  of  God,  and  to  accomplish  this  is  the  very  aim  of  the 
atonement.  Among  all  rational  intelligences,  the  one  cominon  essence 
of  the  kingdom  of  God  is  the  doing  his  will,  and  thus  hallowing  his  name. 
"  Give  us,  day  hy  day,  our  daily  bread."  The  positive  prayers  for 
the  supply  of  Divine  wants  are  followed  by  one  (and  only  one)  for  the 
supply  of  human  wants  ;  in  regard  to  which,  also,  the  disciple  of  Christ 
must  cherish  an  abiding  consciousness  of  dependence  on  the  Heavenly 
Father.  It  is  not  the  tendency  of  Christianity  to  stifle  or  suppress  the 
wants  of  our  earthly  nature,  but  to  hallow  them  by  referring  them  to 

are  omitted.  It  is  probable  tliat  the  oridnal  form  of  the  prayer  is  that  piven  by  Matiliew. 
Luke  is  more  accurate  iu  giving  tlie  chrouological  and  historical  connexion  of  Christ's  dis- 
courses, but  Matthew  gives  the  discourses  themselves  more  in  full. 

*  In  Hebrew  and  Hellenistic  usage,  the  name  expresses  the  outward  self-revelntion  of 
the  tliirnj;  ;  the  image  of  the  thing,  as  such,  or  iu  some  defined  relation.  Where  the  Occi 
dentalist  would  use  the  idea,  the  Orientalist,  iii  his  vividly  intuitive  language,  i)uts  the 
Tiame.    The  sense  then  is,  "  God  is  to  be  hallowed  as  God,  the  common  rather." 


THE  LORD'S  TRAYER.  209 

God  ;  at  the  same  time  keeping  them  in  their  proper  sphere  of  subor- 
dination to  the  higher  interests  of  the  soul. 

"  And  forgive  us  our  sins,  for  we  also  forgive  every  one  that  is  indcltccl 
to  us."  The  first  negative  prayers  correspond  to  the  first  positive  ones. 
Conscious  of  a  manifold  sinfulness,  which,  so  long  as  it  remains,  hin- 
ders the  full  develoj^ement  of  the  kingdom  of  God  within  them,  the 
disciples  of  Christ  pray  for  forgiveness  of  past  sins,  originating  in  the 
reaction  of  the  old  evil  nature.  But  they  cannot  pray  for  this,  with 
conscious  need  of  pardon,  without  a  disposition,  at  the  same  time,  to 
forgive  the  wrongs  which  others  have  done  to  themselves ;  only  thus 
can  their  prayer  be  sincere,  only  thus  can  they  expect  it  to  be  an- 
swered. The  Christian's  constant  sense  of  the  need  of  God's  pardon- 
ing grace  for  himself  necessarily  gives  tone  to  his  conduct  towards  his 
fellows. 

'■'And  lead  us  not  into  temptation,  but  deliver  us  from  evil."  The 
prayer  for  pardon  of  past  sins  is  followed  by  one  for  deliverance  in  the 
future.  The  word  "  temptation"  has  a  two-fold  meaning  in  Scripture, 
expressing  either  outward  trials  of  Christian  faith  and  virtue,  or  an  in- 
ward point  of  contact  for  outward  incitements,  caused  by  the  strife  of 
the  sinful  principle  with  the  life  of  God  in  the  soul ;  and  the  question 
may  be  asked,  which  of  the  two — the  objective  or  sulijective  tempta- 
tion— is  referred  to  in  the  prayer.  Certainly  Christ  could  not  have  in- 
tended that  his  disciples  should  pray  for  exemption  from  external  con- 
flicts and  sufferings;  for  these  are  inseparable  from  the  callino-  of  sol- 
diers of  the  kingdom  in  this  world,  and  essential  for  the  confirmation 
of  Christian  faith  and  virtue,  and  for  culture  in  the  Christian  life;  and 
He  himself  told  them  that  such  trials  would  become  the  salt  of  their 
interior  life.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  the  prayer  cannot  be  confined 
to  purely  subjective  temptations;  for  Christ  could  not  have  presup- 
posed that  God  would  do  any  thing  so  contradictory  to  His  own  holi- 
ness as  to  lead  men  into  temptation  in  tJiis  sense.  A  combination  of 
the  two  appears  to  be  the  true  idea  of  the  prayer :  "  Lead  us  not  into 
such  situations  as  will  form  for  us,  in  our  weakness,  incitements  to  sin  ;" 
thus  laying  it  down  as  a  rule  of  life  for  Christians  not  to  put  them- 
selves, self-confidently,  in  such  situations,  but  to  avoid  them  as  far  as 
duty  will  allow.  But  every  thing  depends  upon  deliverance  from  the 
internal  incitement  to  sin  ;  and  hence,  necessarily,  the  concluding 
clause  of  the  petition,  "  Deliver  us  from  inward  temptation  by  the 
power  of  the  Evil  One."  Confiding,  in  the  struggle  with  evil,  upon 
the  power  of  God,  we  need  not  fear  such  outward  temptations  as  are 
unavoidable. 

Thus  the  prayer  accurately  defines  the  relation  of  the  Chnstian  to 
God.  The  disciple  of  Christ,  ever  called  to  struggle  against  evil, 
which  finds  a  point  of  contact  in  his  inward  nature,  cannot  fight  this 

O 


210  FIRST  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

battle  in  his  own  strength,  but  always  stands  in  need  of  the  assistance 
of  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  prayer  holds  the  fundamental  truths  of  Chris- 
tian faith  before  the  religious  consciousness,  in  their  essential  connex- 
ion with  each  other — God,  revealed  in  Christ,  who  redeems  man, 
formed  after  his  image,  yet  estranged  from  him  by  sin ;  who  imparts 
to  him  that  Divine  life  which  is  to  be  led  on  by  him  to  its  consumma- 
tion through  manifold  strifes  against  the  Power  of  Evil. 

It  appears,  therefore,  that  Christ  did  not  intend  by  "  the  Lord's 
Prayer"  to  pi-escribe  a  standing  form  of  prayer  to  his  disciples,  but  to 
set  vividly  before  their  minds  the  peculiar  nature  of  Christian  prayer, 
in  opposition  to  heathen  ;  and,  accordingly,  he  followed  it  up  by  urging 
them  to  present  their  wants  to  their  Heavenly  Father  with  the  most 
undoubting  confidence  (Luke,  xi.,  5-13).  By  a  comparison  drawn 
from  the  ordinary  relations  of  life,  he  teaches  that  if  our  prayers  should 
not  appear  to  be  immediately  answered,  we  must  only  persevere  the 
more  earnestly  (v.  5-S)  ;  and  then  impresses  the  thought  that  God  can- 
not deny  the  anxious  longings  of  his  children  (9,  10). 

Here,  also,  the  internal  character  of  Christian  prayer  is  strongly  con- 
trasted with  the  pagan  outward  conception  of  the  exercise.  Even  the 
"  seeking,"  the  longing  of  the  soul,  that  turns  with  a  deep  sense  of  need 
to  God,  is  prayer  already  ;  indeed,  there  is  no  Cliristiaji  prayer  with- 
out such  a  feeling.  The  comparison  that  follows  (v.  11-13)  glances 
(like  the  Lord's  Prayer)  from  the  relation  of  child  and  parent  on  earth 
to  that  of  the  children  of  God  to  their  Father  in  heaven — a  compaiison 
opposed,  in  the  highest  conceivable  degrees,  to  all  Pantheistical  and 
Deistical  notions  of  the  relations  between  God  and  creation.  "  If  a 
son  shall  ash  hread  of  any  of  yon  tliat  is  a  father,  will  he  give  him  a 
stone  (in  shape  resembling  the  loaf)  %  or,  f  he  ask  a  fish,  loill  he  give 
him  a  serpent  ?  or,  fhe  ask  an  egg,  icill  he  offer  a  scorpion  1  And  how 
should  your  Heavenly  Father,*  of  whose  perfect  love  all  human  affec- 
tion  is  but  a  darkened  image,  mock  the  necessities  of  his  children  by 
withholding  from  their  longing  hearts  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  alone  can 
satisfy  the  hunger  of  their  spirits'?"  Here,  again,  as  in  the  Lord's 
Prayer,  the  main  objects  of  Christian  prayer  are  shown  to  be  spiritual ; 
the  giving  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  one  chief  good  of  the  Christian,  in- 
cludes all  other  gifts.t 

*  The  words  " r^ar'ng  h  l\  uvftavoh"  Luke,  xi.,  13,  plainly  point  to  the  invocntion  in  the 
Lord's  Prayer. 

t  Cf.  the  indefinite  iiyMa,  in  Matt.,  vii.,  11,  generalized  from  the  idftara  dyaOa  in  the  first 
clause  of  the  verse.  The  "  Holy  Ghost"  answers  definitely  to  the  point  of  comparison — 
the  nourishment  of  the  soul,  as  bread  is  to  the  body. 


THE  MAGDALEN.  211 

§  140.  Christ  forgives  tlie  Magdalen  at  the  House  rif  Simon  the  Phari- 
see*—  The  reciprocal  action  of  Love  and  Faith  in  the  Forgiveness  oj 
Sins. 

It  was  Christ's  free  mode  of  life  with  his  disciples,  his  intercourse 
with  classes  of  people  despised  by  the  Pharisees,  his  seeking  the  so- 
ciety even  of  the  degraded,  in  order  to  save  them,  which  first  drew 
upon  him  the  assaults  of  that  haughty  and  conceited  sect. 

On  one  occasion  he  was  invited  to  dine  with  one  of  the  Pharisees, 
named  Simon,  a  man  certainly  incapable  of  appreciating  the  Saviour. 
Either  from  his  natural  temper,  or  from  his  peculiar  disposition  to- 
wards Christ,  he  gave  him  but  a  cool  reception.  While  the  Saviour 
was  there,  a  woman  came  in  who  had  previously  led  a  notoriously  vi- 
cious life,  but  who  now,  convinced  of  sin  and  groaning  under  it,  sought 
consolation  from  Christ,  from  whom  she  had  doubtless  previously  re- 
ceived Divine  impressions.  She  threw  herself  at  his  feet,  moistened 
them  with  her  tears,  wiped  them  with  her  hair,  and  anointed  them 
with  ointment.  With  what  power  must  He  have  attracted  the  bur- 
dened soul,  when  a  woman,  goaded  by  conscience,  could  come  to  him 
with  so  sui'e  a  hope  of  obtaining  balm  for  her  wounded  heart  ! 

The  Pharisee  was  astonished  that  He  should  have  any  thing  to  do 
with  her.  "  Were  this  man,"  thought  he,  "  possessed  of  the  prophet's 
glance,  piercing  the  thoughts  of  men,  he  could  not  be  so  deceived." 
Christ,  noticing  his  amazement,  gave  an  explanation  of  the  principle  on 
which  he  acted,  that  must  have  shamed  and  humbled  Simon  ;  contrast- 
ing his  cold  hospitality  with  the  heartfelt  love  which  the  woman,  though 
oppressed  with  grief  and  sin,  had  manifested  for  him.  Looking  at  the 
disposition  of  the  heart,  he  prefers  the  woman — guilty,  indeed,  before, 
but,  even  for  that  reason,  now  longing  the  more  earnestly  for  salvation, 
and  penetrated  with  holy  love — to  the  cold,  haughty,  self-righteous 
Pharisee,  who,  with  all  his  outward  show  of  observing  the  law,  was 
destitute  of  quickening  love,  the  essential  principle  of  a  genuine  Di- 
vine life.  "  Her  sins,"  said  he,  "  which  are  many,  are  all  forgiven,  for 
she  loved  much  ;  hut  to  whom  little  is  forgiven,  he  loveth  little.''^ 

It  is  love,  according  to  Jesus,  which  gives  to  religion  and  morality 
their  true  import.  The  faith  of  the  woman  proved  itself  genuine,  be- 
cause it  sprang  from,  and  begat  love  ;  the  love  from  the  faith,  the  faith 
from  the  love.  Her  grief  for  her  sins  was  founded  in  her  love  to  the 
Holy  God,  to  whom,  conscious  of  her  estrangement,  she  now  felt  her- 
self drawn.  Her  desire  for  salvation  led  her  to  Jesus  ;  her  love  aided 
her  in  finding  a  Saviour  in  him  ;  with  warm  love  she  embraced  him  as 
such,  even  before  he  pronounced  the  pardon  of  her  sins.  Therefore 
*  Luke,  vii.,  36,  seq. 


212  FIRST  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

Christ  said  ofhev,  "  Hei*  many  sins  are  forgiven,  because  she  has  loved 
much  ;"  and  to  her,  "  Thy  faith  hath  saved  thee,  go  in  peace  ;"  thus  ex- 
hibiting the  reciprocal  relations  of  the  two — the  faith  proving  itself 
true  by  the  love.  The  Pharisee,  whose  feelings  were  ossified,  bound 
up  in  the  mechanism  of  the  outward  law,  was  especially  lacking  in  the 
love  which  could  lead  to  faith;  and  therefore,  in  speaking  to  him,  the 
woman's  love,  and  not  her  faith,  was  made  prominent  by  Christ. 

The  very  vices  of  the  woman  made  her  conviction  more  profound, 
her  desire  for  salvation  more  ardent,  her  love  for  the  Redeemer,  who 
pronounced  her  sins  forgiven,  more  deep  and  heartfelt.  But  she  had 
not,  even  in  the  midst  of  her  transgressions,  been  further  removed  from 
the  true,  inward  holiness  that  springs  from  the  Divine  life,  than  was  the 
Pharisee  in  his  best  estate.  He  separated  himself  from  God  as  effec- 
tually, by  that  unfeeling  selfishness  which  often  coexists  with  what  is 
called  morality,  and  with  a  conspicuous  sanctity  of  good  works,  as  if  he 
had  yielded,  like  the  woman,  to  the  power  of  evil  passions.  He  was 
none  the  better  because  his  colder  nature  offered  no  salient  points  for 
such  temptations.  Christ's  standard  of  morality  was  different  from  that 
which  the  world,  deceived  by  appearances,  is  wont  to  apply.  The 
Pharisee  had  succeeded  in  avoiding  these  glaring  sins,  and  in  keeping 
a  fair  show  of  obedience  to  the  law ;  but  all  this  only  propped  up  his 
self-deceiving  egotism,  which  delighted  in  the  illusion  of  self-righteous- 
ness. In  such  a  man,  the  sense  of  alienation  from  God,  the  conscious- 
ness of  sin,  as  an  abyss  between  him  and  the  Holy  One,  without  which 
there  can  be  no  true  repentance,  could  find  no  place. 

Nay,  the  abject  woman,  in  her  course  of  vice,  may  have  been  nearer 
to  the  kingdom  than  the  haughty  and  self-righteous  man  ;  even  then, 
there  may  have  been  a  spark  of  love,  stifled,  indeed,  by  sensuality,  but 
still  existing  in  her  heart,  which  needed  only  the  touch  of  a  higher 
power  to  kindle  into  flame.  In  her  case,  what  was  in  itself  bad  may 
have  been  a  means  of  gootl  ;  good,  however,  which  certahily  might 
have  been  arrived  at  by  another  road.  The  pangs  of  repentance  made 
her  susceptible  of  Divine  impressions,  the  Divine  love  that  met  her 
kindled  the  spark  in  her  own  heart ;  and  she  rose,  by  the  living  faith 
of  love,  above  the  Pharisee,  who,  in  his  arrogant  selfishness,  was  hard- 
ened against  Divine  impressions,  and  did  not  recognize  the  love  of 
God,  even  when  he  saw  it  manifested.* 

*  The  simplicity  of  tliis  narrative,  and  the  stamp  of  Christ's  spirit  which  it  bears,  are 
sufficient  jiroofs  of  its  originality  and  truth.  Bat  I  find  no  ground  for  believing  it  to  be 
identical  with  the  anointing  of  Christ  by  Mary  at  Bethanj',  which  also,  according  to  Matt, 
(xxvi.,  C),  occurred  in  the  house  of  a  Simon.  The  resemblances  are  accidental ;  such  things 
could  occur  again  and  again  amid  Oriental  customs.  That  a  woman,  in  order  to  show  her 
reverential  love  for  the  Saviour,  miglit  serve  him  like  a  slave,  wash  liis  feet,  not  with  water, 
but  with  the  costliest  material  in  her  possession,  cVc. ;  all  this  could  easily  have  occurred 
twice,  and  both  times,  loo,  in  the  house  of  a  uiau  named  Simon,  which  was  a  very  common 


CALLING  OF  MATTHEW.  213 

§  141.  MattJieio  tlie  Publican  called  from  the  Custom-house. — Fainiliar 
Intercourse  of  Christ  with  the  Publicans  at  the  Banquet. —  The  Phar- 
isees blame  the  Disciples,  and,  Christ  justifies  them. — "  The  Sick  need 
the  Physician.^' 

What  surprise  and  offence  must  the  Pharisees  have  felt  when  they 
saw  Christ  admit  even  a,  publican  into  the  immediate  circle  of  his  dis- 
ciples.* 

As  he  was  walking  one  day  along  the  shore  of  the  lake,t  he  saw  a 
publican  sitting  in  his  toll-booth,  named  Matthew  ;  a  man  who  had 
doubtless,  like  Peter,  received  many  impressions  from  Christ  before, 
and  was  thereby  prepared  to  renounce  the  woi'ld  at  his  bidding.  Jesus, 
with  a  voice  that  could  not  be  resisted,  said  unto  him,  "  Follow  ?ne." 
Matthew  understood  the  call,  and  did  not  hesitate  to  follow,  at  any 
cost.  Him  who  had  so  powerfully  attracted  his  heart.  He  left  his  busi- 
ness, rejoicing  that  Christ  was  willing  to  take  him  into  his  closer  fellow- 
ship. This  decisive  event  was  celebrated  by  a  great  entertainment,^ 
intended  also,  perhaps,  as  a  farewell  feast  to  his  old  business  associates. 

name  among  the  Jews ;  although  it  is  possible  that  the  name  may  have  been  transferred 
from  the  one  acconnt  to  the  other.  But  while  the  resemblances  are  accidental,  the  differ- 
cnces  are  substantial.  In  the  one  the  woman  is  an  awakened  sinner  ;  in  the  other,  one  who 
had  always  led  a  devout  life,  and  was,  at  the  time,  seized  with  additional  gratitude  at  the 
saving  of  a  beloved  brother's  life.  In  the  one,  the  different  relations  in  which  a  self-righ- 
teous Pharisee  and  an  awakened  sinner  stand  to  Christ,  who  rejects  no  repentant  sinner, 
are  set  forth ;  in  the  other,  a  heartfelt  love,  which  knows  no  measure,  is  contrasted  with 
tlie  common  mind,  incapable  of  comprehending  such  love.  In  the  one  it  is  Christ  that  is 
blamed  and  justified  ;  in  the  other,  the  woman. 

*  There  are  discrepancies  in  the  narrative  of  the  calling  of  Matthew,  not,  however,  af- 
fecting the  credibility  of  the  account,  which  comes  from  several  independent  sources,  and 
bears  no  marks  of  exaggeration.  In  Matthew's  Gospel,  ix.,  9,  the  person  here  spoken  of 
is  called  Malthew,  and  in  x.,  3,  Matthew  the  publican  is  mentioned  among  the  Apostles  ;  but 
in  Lake,  v.,  27  ;  Mark,  ii.,  14,  he  is  called  Levi.  Mark  appears  to  be  more  definite  than 
the  others,  calling  him  the  soa  of  Alpheus,  which  does  not  look  like  a  fanciful  designation. 
The  difficulty  might  be  overcome  by  supposing  (what  was  not  uncommon  among  the  Jews 
that  the  same  man  was  designated  in  the  one  case  by  the  name,  in  the  other  by  the  sur- 
name. An  objection  to  this  (though  not  decisive)  is  the  fact  that  in  the  list  of  Apostles 
given  in  Matt.,  x.,  3,  he  is  called  merely  Matthew  the  pnhlican,  with  no  suniame,  and  in  the 
lists  given  by  Mark  and  Luke,  Matthew,  simply,  with  no  surname ;  and,  further,  that  an  old 
tradition  existed,  which  discriminated  Matthew  and  Levi,  and  named  the  latter,  in  addi- 
tion, among  the  prominent  heralds  of  the  Gospel.  (Heracleou,  in  Clem.  Alex.,  Strom.,  1. 
iv.,  c.  xi.)  On  this  ground  we  might  admit,  with  Siefferl,  that  the  names  of  two  persons, 
?'.  e.,  of  the  Apoxtle  Mattliew,  and  some  other  who  had  been  admitted,  at  least,  among  the 
Seventy,  had  been  confounded  together.  But  as  Matthew  himself  was  the  original  source 
of  the  materials  of  the  Gospel  which  bears  his  name  (materials  aiTanged,  perhaps,  by  an- 
other hand),  we  cannot  attribute  the  confusion  to  this  Gospel.  It  is,  at  the  same  time,  pos- 
sible that  the  giver  of  the  feast  (Luke,  v.,  29),  Levi,  was  another  rich  publican,  a  friend  of 
the  publican  Matthew,  who  afterward  also  attached  himself  to  Jesus  ;  especially  as  no- 
thing is  said  in  Matt.,  ix.,  10,  about  a  gi-eat  feast  being  given  at  the  house  of  Matthew  :  and 
that  thus  the  name  of  Matthew,  whose  call  to  the  ministry  occasioned  the  feast,  and  that 
of  Levi,  the  host,  in  whose  life  it  made  an  epoch,  and  who  aftei-ward  became  known  as  a 
preacher  of  the  Gospel,  were  confounded  together. 

t  Mark,  ii.,  13.  %  Luke,  v.,  29. 


214  FIRST  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

Christ,  in  whose  honour  the  entertainment  was  given,  did  not  disdain 
this  token  of  gi-ateful  love,  but  took  his  place  at  the  feast  with  a  set  of 
men  who  were  regarded  as  the  scum  of  the  people,  but  to  whom  his 
saving  influences  were  to  be  brought  nigh. 

Shortly  after,  some  of  the  Pharisees  took  the  disciples  to  task  for 
their  free  and  (as  they  thought)  unspiritual  mode  of  life,  in  eating  and 
drinking  with  degraded  sinners  and  tax-gatherers.  It  is  evident  that 
the  attack  was  intended  for  Christ,  though  they  hesitated,  as  yet,  to  as- 
sault him  openly.  He,  therefore,  took  the  matter  up  personally,  and 
justified  his  conduct  by  saying,  "  They  that  are  tchole  need  not  a  phy- 
sician, but  they  that  are  sick.'"  Indicating  that  he  sought,  rather  than 
avoided,  degraded  sinners,  because  they,  precisely,  stood  most  in  need 
of  his  healing  aid,  and  were  most  likely,  from  a  sense  of  need,  to  re- 
ceive it  willingly. 

But  he  certainly  did  not  mean  to  say  that  he  came  to  save  only  those 
who  were  sunken  in  vice.  He  was  far,  also,  from  meaning,  that 
though  all  have  need  of  him,  all  have  not  the  same  need  of  him ;  that 
any  were  excluded  from  the  number  of  the  "  sick,"  who  needed  him 
as  a  "physician."  But  he  taught  that  as  he  had  come  as  a  physician 
for  the  sick,  he  could  help  only  those  who,  as  sick  persons,  sought  heal- 
ing at  his  hands.  He  sought  the  tax-gatherers  rather  than  the  Phari- 
sees, because  the  latter,  deeming  themselves  spiritually  sound,  had  no 
<lisposition  to  receive  that  which  he  came  to  imjiart.  Undoubtedly,  he 
did  not  mean  to  grant  that  they  were  sound,  or  less  diseased  than  the 
publicans. 

Indeed,  he  pointed  out  their  peculiar  disease  by  saying  to  them, 
"  Go  ye,  and  learn  ichat  that  mcaneth,  '  I  to  ill  have  mercy,  and  not  sac- 
rificed "*  On  the  one  hand,  by  this  quotation,  he  pointed  out  the  feeling 
that  inspired  his  own  conduct,  the  love  which  is  the  fulfilling  of  the 
law;  and,  on  the  other,  he  indicated  their  fundamental  error  of  making 
religion  an  outward  thing,  while  they  totally  lacked  the  soul  of  genu- 
ine piety.  This  was  to  convince  them  that  they  themselves  were  sick 
and  needed  the  physician.  Dropping  the  figure,  he  gave  them  the 
same  thought  in  plain  terms  :  "  /  cavie  not  to  call  the  righteous^  hut  sin- 
ners to  repentance." 

§  141.   Christ's  different  Modes  of  Reply  to  those  tvho  questioned  his  Con- 
duct in  consorting  with  Sinners. —  TJte  Value  of  a  Soul. — Parable  of 
the  Prodigal  Son. — Of  the  Pharisee  ajul  the  Pvhlican. 
There  is  a  difference  in  one  respect  in  Christ's  replies  at  differen 
times  to  those  who  found  fault  with  his  kindness  to  publicans  and  de 
graded  sinners.     In  some  cases  he  stopped  short  after  vividly  exhibiting 

t  Matt.,  ix.,  13  ;  Hos.,  vi.,  6. 


THE  PRODIGAL  SON.  015 

the  mercy  of  God  to  all  truly  repentant  sinners ;  in  others,  he  not  only 
justified  his  own  conduct,  but  took  the  offensive  against  those  who  had 
attacked  him,  and  showed  them  their  own  deficiencies  in  true  rio-h- 
teousness,  and  their  inferiority  to  the  sincerely  repentant  publicans. 
The  former  course  was  probably  taken  with  those  who  were  more  sin- 
cerely striving  after  righteousness,  and  who  took  offence  at  him  on  pur- 
er grounds.  It  is  necessary  to  note  this  distinction  in  order  to  appre- 
hend Christ's  words  rightly,  and  to  derive,  from  comparing  his  discours- 
es together,  a  connected  system  of  doctrine. 

Under  the  first  class  may  be  placed  the  parables  which  are  recorded 
in  the  fifteenth  cha^^ter  of  Luke.  In  verses  3-10  we  have  a  vivid  illus- 
tration of  the  value  which  God  attaches  to  the  salvation  of  one  soul, 
shown  by  the  great  joy  which  the  repentance  of  a  sinner  causes  in  a 
world  of  spirits,  allied  in  their  sympathies  to  Him.  This  is  the  one 
point  which  is  to  be  made  prominent  and  emphatic  in  interpretinf>-  the 
passage ;  we  should  err  in  pressing  the  separate  points  of  comparison 
further. 

To  the  same  class,  also,  belongs  the  parable  of  the  Prodigal  Son* 
The  elder  son,  who  remains  at  home  and  serves  his  father  faithfully,  rep- 
resents a  Phariseet  of  the  better  class,  who  sincerely  stiives  to  keep  the 
law  and  is  free  from  glaring  sins,  but  still  occupies  a  strictly  legal 
stand-point.  The  younger  son  represents  one  who  seeks  his  highest 
good  ui  the  world,  throws  off  the  restraints  of  the  law,  and  gives  full 
play  to  his  passions.  But  experience  shows  him  the  emptiness  of  such 
a  life  ;  estranged  from  God,  he  becomes  conscious  of  wretchedness,  and 
returns,  sincerely  penitent,  to  seek  forgiveness  in  the  Father's  love. 

Christ  does  not  go  far,  in  this  parable,  in  illustrating  the  deficien- 
cies of  the  Pharisee.  His  legal  righteousness  goes  without  specific  re- 
buke, but  his  envy  (v.  28)  and  his  want  of  love  ("  the  fulfilling  of  the 
law")  show  clearly  the  emptiness  of  his  morality.  It  may  have  been 
the  Saviour's  intention  to  lead  the  person  here  represented  to  discover, 
of  himself,  his  total  want  of  the  substance  of  religion. 

The  one  chief  point  of  the  parable  is  to  illustrate,  under  the  fifure 
of  relations  drawn  from  human  life,  the  manner  in  which  the  paternal 
love  of  God  meets  the  vilest  of  sinners  when  he  returns  sincerely 
penitent.  How  strikingly  does  this  picture  of  the  Father's  love,  ever 
ready  to  pardon  sin,  rebuke  not  merely  the  Jeivish  exclusiveness,  but  all 
those  limitations  of  God's  purposes  for  the  salvation  of  the  human  race, 

*  Luke,  XV.,  11-32. 

t  This  must  be  the  case,  on  ^he  supposition  that  Luke,  xv.,  2,  expresses  the  precise  oc 
casion  of  this  parable,  but  we  cannot  positively  assert  this.  It  is  possible  that  one  of  the 
disciples  who  had  not  fully  imbibed  the  spirit  of  Christ  may  have  given  the  occasion  for  it. 


215  FIRST  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

whether  before  or  after  Christ,  which  the  arbitrary  creeds  of  men  have 
attributed  to  the  Divine  decrees  !  The  parable  clearly  implies  that 
the  love  of  the  Father  contemplates  the  salvation  of  all  his  fallen  chil- 
dren, among  all  generations  of  men.  Yet  it  by  no  means  excludes, 
although  it  does  not  expressly  declare,  the  necessity  of  the  mediatorial 
work  of  Christ ;  we  must  not  expect  to  find  the  whole  circle  of  Chris- 
tian doctrine  in  every  parable.  Indeed,  the  mediation  of  Christ  itself 
is  the  precise  way  in  which  the  paternal  love  of  God  goes  out  to  meet 
and  welcome  all  his  fallen  children  when  they  return  in  repentance. 
The  parable  images  the  condition  of  fallen  man  in  general,  as  well  as 
of  that  class  of  gross  sinners  to  which,  from  the  occasion  on  which  Christ 
uttered  it,  it  necessarily  gives  special  pi'orainence. 

The  line  of  distinction  between  the  Pharisee  and  the  publican  is  still 
more  closely  drawn  in  the  parable  contained  in  Luke,  xviii.,  9-14.* 
The  publican  humbles  himself  before  God,  deeply  sensible  of  sin,  and 
only  seeking  forgiveness,  and  is  therefore  represented  as  ha\'ing  the 
dispositions  necessary  for  pardon  and  justification.  The  Pharisee, 
trusting  in  his  supposed  righteousness,  exalts  himself  above  the  noto- 
rious sinner,  and  is  therefore  destitute  of  the  conditions  of  pardon, 
though  he  needs  it  as  much  as  the  other.  Christ  himself  deduces  from 
the  example  this  general  truth  :  "  Eccnj  one  that  cxalteth  himself  shall 
be  abased,  and  he  that  htcmbleth  himself  shall  be  exalted.''''  That  is,  he 
who  sets  up  great  pretensions  before  God  on  account  of  his  self-ac- 
(juired  virtue  or  wisdom,  will  be  disappointed  ;  his  arrogant  assump- 
tion of  a  worth  which  is  nothing  but  vileness  will  exclude  him  from 
that  true  dignity  which  the  grace  of  God  alone  can  bestow  ;  which  dig- 
nity will  be  bestowed,  on  the  other  hand,  upon  the  sinner  who  truly 
humbles  himself  before  God  from  a  conscious  sense  of  moral  unwor- 
ihiness. 

In  this  parable  we  find  the  germ  of  Paul's  doctrine ;  even  of  some 
of  his  weighty  expressions  on  this  subject.  The  doctrine  is  the  same 
as  that  which  Christ  taught  in  pronouncing  the  "  poor  in  spirit"  blessed. 

"  This  parable  is  one  (cf.  p.  107)  in  wliich  a  trutli  relating  to  the  king:dom  of  God  is  il- 
lustrated by  an  assumed  fact ;  but  the  fact  is  one  taken  from  the  same  sphere  of  life  as  that 
which  it  intended  to  depict.  Moreover,  the  relation  which  must  exist,  in  all  time,  between 
the  self-righteous  saint  hy  warks  and  the  humbly  penitent  sinner  is  illustrated  bj'  an  ex 
ample  such  as  once  constantly  occurred  in  real  life — in  Pharisees  and  publicans. 


THE  MIRACLE  AT  THE  POOL  OF  BETHESDA.         217 


CHAPTER  Vin. 

CHRIST'S  SECOND  JOURNEY  TO  JERUSALEM.* 

§  143.    The  Miracle  at  the  Pool  of  Bethesda. —  The  Words  of  Christ  in 
the  Temple  to  the  Wan  that  teas  healed.     (John,  v.,  1-14.) 

CHRIST,  having  spent  the  winter  in  Galilee,  was  called  again  to 
Jerusalem  by  the  feast  of  the  Passover.  His  stay  in  the  city  at 
that  feast  forms  a  marked  period  in  his  history ;  for  a  cure  wrought 
upon  a  certain  Sabbath  in  that  time  was  the  occasion,  if  not  the  cause, 
of  a  more  violent  display  of  the  opposition  of  the  Pharisees  than  had 
yet  been  made  against  him. 

A  certain  spring  at  Jerusalem  was  believed  by  the  people  to  possess 
remarkable  healing  powers  at  particular  seasons,  when  its  waters  were 
moved  by  (what  they  supposed  to  be)  a  supernatural  cause.t     It  is  un- 

*  Joliii,  v.,  1.  The  chronology  of  the  hfe  of  Christ  depends  a  good  deal  upon  the  ques- 
tion whether  the  feast  mentioned  John,  v.,  1,  was  or  was  not  the  Passover.  The  indefi- 
niteuess  of  the  word  "feast"  in  this  passage,  and  the  mention  of  the  Passover  itself  in 
John,  vi.,  4,  might  lead  us  to  infer  that  the  feast  of  Furim  was  meant,  which  occurred  a 
few  weeks  before  the  Passover ;  but  every  thing  else  is  against  this  inference.  The  Pu- 
rim  feast  did  not  require  of  the  pious  Jew  avoGaifctv  eis  'lepoadXvua  ;  had  this  feast,  therefore, 
been  in  question,  we  might  expect  iu  John,  v.,  1,  a  statement  of  Christ's  reason  for  going 
up  to  it,  instead  of  waiting  for  the  Passover.  The  most  ancient  interpretation  favours  the 
Passover  (Ireu.,  ii ,  22),  which  feast  was  attended  by  most  of  the  foreign  Jews,  and  re- 
quired the  avaSaiiav.  The  omission  of  the  definite  article  in  the  text  is  not  so  important 
as  some  suppose.  The  text  says  ^v  topri? — "it  -was  feast" — further  defined  by  ufcSti,  show- 
ing that  the  chief  feast  is  intended.  Even  in  German  [or  English]  we  might  say,  loosely, 
"  it  was  feast,"  omitting  the  article,  as  in  the  Greek.  It  is  unlikely,  too,  that  Christ,  who 
had  already  roused  the  prejudices  of  the  Pharisees  against  him,  should  have  gone  to  the 
PuriTn  feast,  where  he  would  have  had  to  contend  with  them  alone  in  Jerusalem,  instead 
of  continuing  his  labours  undisturbed  in  Galilee  until  Passover.  John's  omission  to  say 
more  of  Christ's  ministry  up  to  the  time  of  the  next  Passover  (vi.,  4)  may  be  accounted  for 
on  the  ground  that  it  was  not  his  purpose  to  recount  his  labours  in  Galilee,  which  were 
preserved  in  the  circle  of  the  ordinaiy  traditions.  The  two  first  verses  of  chap.  v.  show 
how  summary  his  account  is.  Only  in  chap,  vii.,  1,  is  an  occasion  offered  for  assigning  the 
reason  for  Christ's  stay  in  Galilee  ;  we  can  the  more  readily  account  for  the  surprise  of  the 
brothers  (vii.,  3,  seq.)  if  he  spent  the  whole  year  and  a  half  hi  Galilee. 

t  Against  the  credibihty  of  this  account,  B retschneidcr  and  Strauss  adduce  the  silence  nf 
Josephus  and  the  Rabbins  iu  regard  to  such  a  healing  spring  ;  but  this  argument — like 
every  argumentum  e  silentio,  unsupported  by  special  circumstances — -is  destitute  of  force. 
These  very  authorities  tell  us  that  there  were  many  mineral  springs  iu  Palestine.  Euse- 
Inus,  iu  his  work,  "  nrpi  tZv  tottikuv  ivoiJaroiv  rwv  iv  Tjj  Siia  ypuiprj,  (Onomasticou),  says,  under 
the  word  "  Btj'^aBd" — "  /cai  vvv  iuKvVTai  iv  rals  avrdBi  \iijvati  iiSvixotS,  iiv  iKaripa.  ficv  Ik  rdv  kcit' 
eroS  ieriov  irXrjpouTai,  ^drepa  ii  vapaSolmg  T!i<}>oiviy'nivov  (iUKwoi  to  vSuip,  I'xi'Of,  &S  (paat,  <j>ipovoa  tuiv 
■ndXat  KaBaipojikvoiv  Upduiv,  Trap'  0  Kat  npoSariKri  KaXurai  Siil  Tti  Sv/iata."  (Hieron.,  0pp.,  ed.  Val- 
lars.,  torn,  iii.,  pt.  i.,  p.  181.)  The  old  ti-adition,  that  the  waters  had  become  "  red,"  from  the 
washing  of  the  sacrifices  in  them  in  old  times,  leads  to  the  conclusion  that  it  contained  pe- 
culiar components.  The  legend  of  the  angel  (in  v.  4,  which,  according  to  the  best  criti- 
cism, does  not  belong  to  John,  but  is  a  later  gloss)  could  not  have  arisen  unless  the  spring 
and  its  phenomena  really  existed.     Robinson  (Palestine,  ii.,  137,  156)  thinks  that  he  found 


218  SECOND  JOURNEY  TO  JERUSALEM. 

important  whether  this  belief  was  an  old  one,  or  was  called  forth  at  a 
later  period  by  actual  occurrences,  of  which,  as  was  common,  too 
much  was  made.  The  healing-spring  itself,  or  the  covered  colonnade 
connected  with  it,  was  called  Bcthesda*  ("  place  of  mercy"). 

At  this  fountain  Christ  found,  on  the  Sabbath  day,  a  man  who  had 
been  lame  for  thirty-eight  years,  and  had  long  waited  for  the  moving 
of  the  waters  in  hope  of  relief,  but  had  never  been  able  to  avail  him- 
self of  it  for  want  of  a  kind  hand  to  help  him  into  the  water  at  the  au- 
spicious moment.  It  is  probable  that  many  pressed  to  the  spring  in 
haste  to  catch  the  passing  instant  when  its  healing  powers  were  active. 
But  the  sick  man  was  to  find  help  from  a  far  different  source.  \Jcsus 
saith  unto  him.  Arise,  take  up  thy  bed  and  walk,  and.  immediately  the 
man  was  made  tohole^ 

The  restored  man  lost  sight  of  the  Saviour  in  the  throng,  but  after- 
ward Christ  found  him  in  the  Temple,  where  he  had  probably  first 
gone  in  order  to  thank  God  for  his  recovery.  The  favourable  moment 
was  seized  by  the  Saviour  to  direct  his  mind  from  the  healing  of  his 
body  to  that  of  his  soul.  His  words,  "  Sin  no  more,  lest  a  tvorse  thing 
come  unto  thee,'"'  may  be  considered  either  as  implying  that  the  sick- 
ness, in  this  particular  case,  was  caused  by  sin,  or  as  referring  to  the 
general  connexion  between  sin  and  physical  evil,  in  virtue  of  which  the 
latter  is  a  memorial  of  the  former  as  its  source.  In  either  view  they 
were  intended  to  remind  him  of  his  spiritual  necessities,  and  to  point 
out  the  only  way  in  which  they  could  be  relieved. 

§  144.  The  Pharisees  accuse  Christ  of  Salhath-hrcaking  and  Blas- 
phemy.— His  Justification.     (John,  v.,  10,  17-19.) 

This  occurrence  gave  the  Pharisees  the  first  occasion  (so  far  as  we 
know)  to  accuse  Christ  of  breaking  the  Sabbath  and  of  blasj)hemino- 
against  God.  The  first  accusation  was  made  in  their  contracted  sense 
of  the  Sabbatical  law,  and  of  its  violation  ;  the  latter  arose  from  their 
legal  Monotheism,  and  their  narrow  idea  of  the  Messianic  office. 

In  his  justification,  Christ  struck  at  the  root  of  the  first  error,  viz., 
the  carnal  notion  that  the  sanctity  of  the  Sabbath  was  founded  solely 
upon  God's  resting  after  the  work  of  creation,  as  if  his  creative  labours 
were  then  commenced  and  ended  ;  and  points  out,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  ever-continuing  activity  of  God  as  the  ground  of  all  being — my 
Father  worketh  hitherto,  and  I  tcork.*     ("  As  He  never  ceases  to  work, 

in  tlie  irregnlar  movement  of  the  water  in  the  "Fountain  of  the  Virgin"  phenomena  similar 
to  those  recorded  of  tiio  Pool  of  Bethesda,  and  contributing  to  explain  them. 

♦  TDn   and  7113. 

*  Jolm,  v.,  17.    Tliis  is  not  out  of  place,  nor  boiTowed  from  Philo,  as  some  suppose,  nor 
a  more  metaphysical  proposition,  but  one  belonging  immediately  to  the  reh^'ious  conscious- 


CHRIST'S  GREATER  WORKS.  219 

so  do  I  work  unceasingly  for  the  salvation  of  men.")  He  rejects  the 
naiTOw  limits  which  their  contracted  view  of  the  law  of  the  Sabbath 
would  assign  to  his  healing  labours,  which  were  to  go  on  uninterrupt- 
edly. Nor  did  he  lower  his  tone  in  regard  to  the  relations  which  he 
sustained  to  his  Heavenly  Father  because  his  opponents  charged  him 
with  claiming,  by  his  words,  Divine  dignity  and  authority.  On  the  con- 
trary, he  strengthened  his  assertions,  taking  care  only  to  guard  against 
their  being  perverted  into  a  depreciation  of  the  Father's  dignity,  by 
declaring  that  he  laboured  in  unity  with  the  Father,  and  in  depend- 
ence upon  him.  "  The  Son,"  said  he,  "can  do  nothing  of  himself,  but 
'ichat  he  sceth  the  Father  do"  (He  would  have  to  deny  himself  as  the 
Son  of  God,  before  he  could  act  contrary  to  the  will  and  example  of 
the  Father.) 

§  145.  The  Discourse  continued :  Christ  intimates  his  future  greater 
Works. — His  Judgment,  and  the  Resurrection.  (John,  v.,  20-29.) 
Christ  proceeds  to  declare  (v.  20)  that  the  Father  xvill  shoio  him 
greater  worJcs  than  these,  i.  e.,  than  reviving  the  dead  limbs  of  the  par- 
alytic. And  what  were  these  "  greater  works  V  Without  doubt, 
that  work  which  Christ  always  describes  as  his  gi-eatest — as  the  aim  of 
his  whole  life- — the  awakening,  namely,  of  Divine  life  in  the  spiritually 
dead  humanity  ;  a  work  which  nothing  but  the  creative  efficiency  of 
God  could  accomplish.  "  That  ye  may  marvel ;"  for  those  who  then 
would  not  recognize  the  Son  of  God  in  the  humble  garb  of  the  Son  of 
Man  would  indeed,  at  a  later  period,  be  amazed  to  see  works  (wrought 
by  one  whom  they  believed  to  be  dead)  which  must  be  acknowledged 
to  be  great  in  their  moral  effects,  even  if  their  intrinsic  nature  could 
not  be  understood. 

He  describes  these  greater  works  more  exactly,  and  points  out,  at 
the  same  time,  the  perfect  power  which  he  would  have  to  do  them  in 
the  words :  "  For  as  the  Father  raiseth  up  the  dead,  and  quicheiieth 
them,  even  so  the  Son  quickenetJi  lohom  he  tvill."  The  raising  to  Ufe  is 
as  real  in  the  latter  clause  as  in  the  former.  It  depends  upon  His 
will,  indeed  ;  but  his  is  no  arbitrary  will ;  and  it  follows  that  submis- 
sion to  his  will  is  requisite  before  man  can  receive  this  Divine  life. 
This,  like  that  other  passage — the  wind  hloiveth  ivhere  it  listcth — breaks 
down  the  barriers  within  which  Judaism  inclosed  the  Theocracy  and 
the  Messianic  calling. 

And  because  it  depends  upon  the  Son  to  give  light  to  whom  He 

ness.  It  is  said,  moreover,  that  Christ's  transition  (in  verses  17,  19,  seq.)  from  the  Sabbath 
controversy  to  an  exposition  of  his  higher  dignity  is  out  of  keeping  with  his  clmracter  and 
mode  of  teaching,  as  exhibited  in  the  first  three  Gospels.  What  would  be  said,  then,  if  a 
transitiou  like  that  recorded  in  Matthew,  xii.,  6,  were  recorded  in  John's  Gospel  ? 


1b^ 


2-20        SECOND  JOURNEY  TO  JERUSALEM. 

will,  the  whole  judgment  of  mankind  is  intrusted  to  his  hands.  "  For 
the  Father  judgeth  no  man,  hut  hath  committed  all  judgment  unto  the 
Sony  The  negative  is  joined  to  the  positive.  The  judgment  is 
brought  about  by  men's  bearing  towards  Him  from  whom  alone  they 
can  receive  life  :  "  That  all  men  should  honour  the  Son,  even  as  also 
the])  honour  the  Father.'''  He  that  will  not  recognize  the  Divine  mis- 
sion of  the  Son  dishonours  the  Father  that  sent  him. 

The  truth  thus  enunciated  in  general  terms,  Christ  presented  still 
more  vividly,  by  applying  it  to  his  work  then  beginning,  and  which  was 
to  be  earned  on  through  all  ages,  until  the  final  judgment  and  the  con- 
summation of  the  kingdom  of  God.  "He  that  heareth  my  word,  and, 
helieveth  on  him  that  sent  me,  hath  everlasting  life,  and  shall  not  come 
into  judgment,  hut  is  jiassed  from  death  into  life  (the  true,  everlasting, 
Divine  life).  The  hour  is  comi?ig,  and  noio  is,  when  the  (spiritually) 
dead  shall  hear  the  voice  of  the  Son  of  God,  and  they  that  hear  shall 
live  ;  for  as  the  Father  hath  (the  Source  of  Divine)  life  in  himself, ^o 
hath  he  given  to  the  Son  to  have  (Divine)  life  in  himself  (If  the  Source 
of  life,  which  is  in  God,  had  not  been  communicated  to  the  human  na- 
ture in  him,  then  communion  with  him  could  not  communicate  the 
Divine  life  to  others.)  And  hath  given  him  authority  to  execute  judg- 
ment also,  hecausc  he  is  the  Son  of  Man  (as  7nan  he  is  to  judge  men)," 

His  hearers,  who  saw  him  before  their  eyes  in  human  form,  were 
startled,  doubtless,  by  these  declarations.  They  looked  for  Messiah  to 
establish  a  visihle  kingdom,  with  unearthly  splendours,  expecting  it  to 
be  attended  by  an  outward  judgment ;  and  Christ's  announcement  of  a 
spiritual  agency,  that  was  to  be  coeval  with  the  world's  history,  was 
beyond  their  apprehension.  He  referred  them,  therefore,  to  the  final 
aim  of  the  course  which  he  was  laying  out  for  the  human  race,  the  final 
Messianic  work  of  the  Judgment  and  the  general  ResuiTCction  ;  a 
work  in  itself,  indeed,  more  familiar  to  them,  but  which,  as  ascribed 
to  him,  must  have  still  more  raised  their  wonder.  "Marvel  not  at 
this;  for  the  hour  is  coming  in  which  all  that  are  i?i  the  graves  shall 
hear  his  voice,  and  shall  coine  forth:  they  that  have  done  good,  to  the 
resurrection  of  life ;  and  they  that  have  done  evil,  unto  the  resurrection  of 
damnation'^ 

§  14G.  The  Discourse  continued  :  Christ  Aj>peals  to  the  Testimony  of  his 
Works.  (John,  v.,  30-37.) 
Having  thus  unfolded  his  whole  Messianic  agency,  embracing  both 
the  present  and  the  future,  Christ  returns  (v.  30)  to  the  general  propo- 
sition with  which  he  had  commenced  (in  v.  19).  As  he  had  applied 
his  unity  of  action  with  the  Father  to  his  whole  course,  so  now  he  ap- 
plies it  specifically  to  h\a  judgment,  which  must,  therefore,  be  just  and 


THE  TESTIMONY  TO  CHRIST.  221 

true  :   ^'I  can  of  mine  oicn  self  do  nothing  ;  as  I  hear,  I  judge,  and  my 
judgment  is  just. '" 

His  decision  against  his  opponents  must,  therefore,  be  just  and  true 
also.  They  need  not  say  (he  told  them)  that  his  testimony  was  not  trust- 
worthy, because  given  of  himself  (v.  31).  It  was  another  that  bore 
witness  of  him,  whose  testimony  he  knew  to  be  unimpeachable  (v.  32). 
He  did  not  allude  to  John,  whose  light,  which  had  been  to  them,  as  to 
children,  a  source  of  transitory*  pleasure,  they  had  not  followed  to  the 
point  whither  it  ought  to  have  guided  them ;  he  did  not  allude  to  John's, 
nor,  indeed,  to  any  man's  testimony,  but  to  a  greater,  viz.,  the  works 
themselves,  which  the  Father  had  given  him  to  accomplish,  and- which 
formed  the  objective  testimony  to  the  Divinity  of  his  labours :  "  The 
same  works  that  I  do,  hear  loitness  of  me  that  the  Father  hath  sent  me  ; 
and  the  Father  himsef  which  hath  sent  me,  hath  home  wit?iess  of  tne"\ 
(v.  36,  37). 

§  147.  The  Discourse  continued:  Inccqmcit?/  of  the  Jeivs  to  Understand 
the  Testimony  of  God  as  given  in  the  Scriptures.  (John,  v.,  37-47.) 
It  was  precisely  through  the  works,  Christ  told  them,  that  the  Father 
had  testified  to  him.  "But,"  continued  he,  in  effect,  "  it  is  no  wonder 
that  you  ask  another  testimony  of  me,  seeing  that  you  are  destitute  of 
the  spiritual  capacity  which  is  necessary  to  perceive  fJtis  one.  It  can- 
not be  perceived  with  the  senses  ;|  you  have  never  heard  with  your 
ears  the  voice  of  the  Father,  nor  seen  with  your  eyes  his  form.  God 
does  not  reveal  himself  to  the  fleshly  sense ;  and  in  you  no  other  sense 
is  developed.      And  for  this   reason,  too,  you  cannot  understand  the 

*  The  words  of  John,  v.,  35,  imply  that  the  ministry  of  the  Baptist  belonged  to  the  past, 
and  they  may  have  been  spoken  after  his  death;  although  the  only  necessary  inference  is, 
that  he  had  ceased  his  public  labours. 

t  I  cannot  agree  with  those  who  (like  Liiclce,  Coram.  John,  v.,  37)  refer  the  first  clause  of 
verse  37  to  the  testimony  of  the  Father,  as  given  in  the  Old  Testament.  The  connexion 
demands  a  climax.  But  how  could  the  testimony  of  God  in  the  ScrliJiurex  be  more  dii'ect 
than  in  the  Divine  ageiicij  of  Christ  itself?  There  could  be  no  revelation  more  direct  or 
])0werful  than  this.  The  present  tense  ("the  works  bear  witness")  is  vrsed  in  verse  36,  be- 
cause Christ's  agency  was  still  going  on.  and  to  continue.  But  because  part  of  it  was 
already  past,  and  a  subject  of  contemplation,  the  perfect  tense  is  used  in  verse  37  ("the 
Father  hath  home  witness").  The  37th  verse  looks  back  to  the  36th,  the  S  Tzinipag  /it  refer- 
ring to  the  oTi  b  TTarfip  fit  a-niara^Ke.  The  climax  consists  in  the  transfer  of  what  has  been 
said  of  the  u-orhs,  as  testifying  of  God,  to  God  himself,  as  testifying  through  the  works. 
Then  Christ  shows  why  the  Jews  do  not  perceive  this  testimony,  but  always  demand  new 
proofs.  They  ask  a  testimony  that  can  be  heard  and  perceived  by  the  carnal  senses  ;  and 
there  is  none  such  to  be  had.  God  reveals  himself  only  in  a  spiritual  way,  to  the  indwell- 
in"'  Sense  for  the  Divine.  This  last  they  have  not;  and  the  revelation  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment has  always  been  to  them  a  dead  letter;  the  word  of  God  has  not  peneti-ated  their 
inner  being.  To  this  very  naturally  follows  verse  39,  "  Ye  search  the  Scriptures,  for  in  them 
ye  think  ye  have  eternal  life;"  which  life  only  Christ  can  impart.  In  opposition  to  the 
most  recent  commentators,  1  must  think  this  the  true  connexion  of  the  passage. 

t  We  may  remember  how  the  Jews  were  inclined  to  look  for  TheoiAcmies  (visible  ap- 
pearances of  the  Deitj'). 


222  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

testimony  of  the  Scriptures.  The  word  of  God,  which  you  ou^ht  to 
have  received  ic'ithin  you  fi'om  the  Scriptures,  dwells  not  in  you  ;  it  has 
remained  for  you  simply  outward.  Hence  your  '  searching  of  the 
Scriptures'  is  a  lifeless  thing.  Thinking  that,  in  the  letter  of  the  word, 
you  have  eternal  life,  you  will  not  come  unto  Him  who  alone  imparts 
that  life,  and  to  whom  the  Scriptures  were  only  intended  to  lead;  your 
dispositions  and  mine  are  directly  contrary.  I  am  concerned  only  for 
the  honour  of  God  ;  you  for  your  own.  With  such  a  disposition,  you 
cannot  possibly  believe  in  me.  If  another  should  come,  in  feeling  like 
yourselves,  and  seek,  in  his  own  name,  to  lord  it  among  you,  1dm  you 
will  receive.*  Moses  himself,  for  whose  honour  you  are  zealous,  but 
whose  law  you  violate  whenever  it  clashes  with  your  selfish  interests, 
will  appear  as  your  accuser.  Did  you  truly  believe  Moses — not  ac- 
cording to  the  letter  merely,  but  also  to  the  spirit — you  would  also 
believe  in  me."t 

Had  the  Pharisees  been  truly  sincere  in  observing  the  law,  the  law 
would  have  been  to  them  a  TraicJaywyof  Eiq  Xpiarov  (a  sclioolmaster  to 
lead  to  Christ),  and  they  would  have  discovered  the  element  of  prophecy 
even  in  the  Pentateuch  itself.  Their  adherence  to  the  letter  made 
thejii  blind  to  the  jNIessiah ;  but  their  carnal  mind  caused  their  adherence 
to  the  letter.  Justly,  then,  could  Christ  say  to  them,  "  Ye  strive  for  the 
honour  of  Moses,  yet,  in  fact,  you  seek  your  own  honour  more  than  his, 
and,  therefore,  do  not  believe  him ;  how,  then,  can  you  believe  my  v/ords, 
which  must  appear  altogether  strange  and  new  V 

From  this  time  the  ruling  Pharisaic  party  persecuted  Christ  as  a  most 
dangerous  enemy,  who  exposed  their  sentiments  with  a  power  of  truth 
not  to  be  controverted.  "  Sabbath-breaking  and  blasphemy"  were  the 
pretexts  on  which  they  sought  his  condemnation. 


CHAPTER  IX. 
SECOND  COURSE  OF  EXTENDED  LABOURS  IN  GALILEE. 

SUCH  was  the  affiHation  of  parties  throughout  Judea,  that  the  op- 
position which  the  Pharisees  stirred  up  against  Christ  at  Jerusa- 
lem, soon  made  itself  felt  throughout  the  country.  A  new  epoch  of  his 
ministry  therefore  began. 

*  Cf.  the  predictions,  in  the  synoptical  Gospels,  of  false  prophets  that  should  deceive  the 
people. 

t  For  Moses'  highest  calling  was  to  prepare  the  way  for  Messiah.  Both  by  the  whole 
stage  which  he  occupied  in  the  dcvelopement  of  the  Divine  kingdom,  and  by  individual 
projihetic  intimations  (like  Deut.,  xviii.,  15 ;  Geu.,  iii..  1")  in  their  spiritual  meaning),  ho 
had  pointed  out  the  Messiah. 


SERMON  ON  THE  MOUNT.  2C3 

The  charge  of  heresy  and  blasphemy  having  spread  into  Galilee, 
Christ  was  led  to  unfold,  in  a  connected  discourse,  the  relation  which 
existed  between  the  old  stand-point  of  the  law  and  the  new  era  of  the 
kingdom  of  God  introduced  by  himself.  His  exposition  was  adapted  to 
the  capacities  of  his  hearers  at  the  time,  and,  therefore,  did  «ot  include 
the  circle  of  truths  which  was  afterward  to  be  revealed,  through  the 
Holy  Spirit,  in  the  progress  of  the  kingdom.     This  discpurse  was  the 

SERMON  ON  THE  MOUNT. 
Introduction. 

§  148.  (1.)  Place  and  Circtnnstances  of  the  Delivery  of  the  Sermon; 
(2.)  Its  Sichjcct-matter,  viz. :  the  Kingdom  of  God  as  the  Aim  of  the 
Old  Dispensation ;  (3.)  The  Tioo  Editions,  viz. :  Matthew^s  and 
LuTce's ;  (4.)  Its  Pervading  Rebuke  of  Carnal  Conceptions  of  the 
Messiahship. 

In  the  course  of  the  summer,  as  Jesus  was  returning  from  one  of  his 
extensive  preaching-tours  in  Galilee,  multitudes  followed  him,  attracted 
by  his  words  and  works.  Toward  evening  they  came  near  Capernaum, 
and  a  few  of  the  company  hastened  thither  in  advance,  while  the  greater 
number  remained,  in  order  to  enter  the  city  in  company  with  the  Mas- 
ter. The  multitude  stopped  at  the  foot  of  a  mountain  near  the  town ; 
but  Jesus,  seeking  solitude,  went  higher  up  the  ascent.  The  next 
morning  he  took  his  place  upon  the  declivity  of  the  mountain,  and, 
drawing  his  twelve  disciples  into  a  naiTower  circle  about  him,*  de- 
livered the  discourse.  It  was  intended  for  all  such  as  felt  drawn  to 
follow  him ;  to  teach  them  what  they  had  to  expect,  and  what  wcnild 
be  expected  of  them,  in  becoming  his  disciples ;  and  to  expose  the 
false  representations  that  had  been  made  upon  both  these  points. 

(2.) 
The  connected  system  of  truths  unfolded  in  the  discourse  was  in- 
tended to  exhibit  to  the  people  the  kingdom  of  God  as  the  aim  of  the 
Old  Dispensation  ;  as  the  consummation  for  which  that  dispensation 
prepared  the  way.  The  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  therefore,  forms  the 
point  of  transition  from  the  Law  to  the  Gospel;  Christianity  is  exhib- 
ited in  it  as  Judaism  spiritualized  and  transfigured.  The  idea  of  tho 
kingdom  of  God  is  the  prominent  one ;  the  person  of  the  Theocratic 
king  is  subordinate  thereto.     The  discourse  is  made  up  of  many  sen- 

*  If  Luke,  vi.,  13,  is  Lntended  to  recite  tlie  choosing  of  the  Apostles,  it  is  clear  that  it  is 
(lone  only  uicideutally,  and  not  in  chronological  coimexion.  Luke  does  not  say  that  the 
discourse  was  specially  directed  to  tho  Apostles,  nor  is  there  a  trace  of  internal  evidence 
to  that  effect.  The  discourses  of  Christ  that  7vere  specially  intended  to  teach  the  Apostles 
the  duties  of  their  calling  have  a  very  different  tone. 


224  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

tentious  passages,  calculated,  separately,  to  impress  the  memory  of  the 
hearers,  and  remain  as  fruitful  germs  in  their  hearts  ;  but,  on  the  other 
hand,  bound  together  as  parts  of  an  organic  whole.  This  was  ad- 
mirably adapted  to  preserve  the  discourse,  in  its  essential  features, 
uncoiTuptad  in  transmission. 

(3.) 

Accordingly,  we  find  the  two  editions  (Matt.,  v.,  vi.,  vii.;  and  Luke, 
vi.,  20-29),  each  giving  the  body  of  the  discourse,  with  beginning, 
middle,  and  end ;  although  they  certainly  originated  in  different  tradi- 
tions and  from  different  hearers. 

Comparing  the  two  copies,  we  find  Matthew's  to  be  more  full,  as 
well  as  more  accurate  in  the  details  ;  it  also  gives  obvious  indications 
of  its  Hebrew  origin.  But  the  original  document  of  Matthew  passed 
through  the  hands  of  the  Greek  editor,  who  has  inserted  other  ex- 
pressions of  Christ  allied  to  those  in  the  organic  connexion  of  the  dis- 
course, but  spoken  on  other  occasions.  Assuming  that  what  is  common 
to  Matthew  and  Luke  forms  the  body  of  the  sermon,  we  have  a  stand- 
ard for  deciding  what  passages  do,  and  what  do  not,  belong  to  it  as  a 
connected  whole. 

(4.) 
There  runs  through  the  whole  discourse,  implied  where  it  is  not 
directly  expressed,  a  rebuke  of  the  carnal  tendency  of  the  Jewish  mind, 
as  displayed  in  its  notions  of  the  Messianic  kingdom,  and  of  the  requi- 
sites for  participating  therein  ;  the  latter,  indeed,  depending  entirely 
upon  the  former.  It  was  most  important  to  convince  men  that  raeet- 
ness  for  the  kingdom  depended  not  upon  alliance  to  the  Jewish  stem, 
but  upon  alliance  of  the  heart  to  God.  Their  mode  of  thinking  had  to 
be  modified  accordingly.  A  direct  attack  upon  the  usual  concojJtious 
of  the  nature  and  manifestation  of  the  kingdom  would  have  been  re- 
pelled by  those  who  were  unprepared  for  it;  but  to  show  what  dis- 
positions o?  heart  it  required,  was  to  strike  at  the  root  of  error.  In  his 
mode  of  expression,  indeed,  Christ  adhered  to  the  Jewish  forms  {e.g., 
in  stating  the  beatitudes) ;  but  his  words  were  carefully  adapted  and 
varied,  so  as  to  guard  against  sensuous  intei-pretations.  The  truth  was 
clearly  to  be  seen  through  the  veil. 

I.   The   BeatituJes. 
§  149.  Moral  Requisites  for  Entering  tlie  Kingdom  of  Gad:   (L)  Pov- 
erty of  Spirit;   (2.)  Meekness ;  (3.)  Hungering  a?id  Thirsting  after 
Highteousncss. 

(1.) 
Glancing  at  the  poor,  who  probably  comprised  most  of  his  congre- 


SERMON  ON  THE  MOUNT.  2:7 

that  In  our  life  on  earth  we  are  to  be  prepared,  by  purification  of  heart, 
for  complete  Divine  knowledge.  For  the  rest,  this  promise  leads  over 
to  those  which  relate  to  the  future  everlasting  life  (the  consummation  of 
the  kingdom). 

§  151,  Moral  Relations  of  the  Members  of  the  Kingdom  to  their  Fellow- 
men  :   viz..  They  arc  "  Peace-mahers,''^  and  "  Persecuted." 

Christ  next  describes  certain  relations  in  which  the  members  of  his 
kingdom  stand  to  others.  Inspired  by  love  and  meekness,  they  seek 
j?eace  with  all  men.  But  as  they  serve  a  holy  kingdom,  and  do  battle 
with  the  prevalent  wickedness  of  men,  they  cannot  escape  persecutions. 
Here,  again,  Christ  dissipates  the  hopes  with  which  the  Jews,  expecting 
a  Messiah,  are  wont  to  flatter  themselves.  Instead  of  promising  to  his 
followers  a  kingdom  of  earthly  glory  and  prosperity,  he  predicts  for 
them  manifold  persecutions,  such  as  the  prophets  of  old  had  suffered 
for  the  cause  of  God. 

They  shall  suffer  "  for  righteousness"  sake  ;  but  he  then  |)asses  over, 
from  the  general  Idea  of  the  kingdom  (righteousness — holiness)  to  his 
own  person  :  "  Blessed  are  ye  when  men  shall  revile  you,  &ce.,for  my 
sake"  Their  very  relations  to  Him  were  to  draw  upon  them  all  man- 
ner of  slanders  and  calumnies ;  thus  presupposing  that  the  prevailing 
Jewish  opinions  would  be  opposed  by  his  disciples.* 

The  accompanying  beatitudes  are  also  full  of  meaning.  "  Blessed  are 
the  peace-makers, ybr  they  shall  he  called]  the  children  of  God."  that  is, 
shall  be  Invested  with  the  dignity  and  the  rights  of  children  of  God. 
This  promise  refers  partly  to  the  present  life,  and  partly,  in  Its  high- 
est meaning,  to  the  future.|  "  Blessed  are  they  which  are  persecuted, 
for  theirs  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  ..."  For  great  is  your  reward 
in  heaven." 

The  "reward"  may  be  understood,  even  apart  from  what  Christ  has 
said  elsewhere,  from  the  connexion  of  this  discourse  itsel£§  The  first 
beatitudes  show  that  we  have  no  claim  to  the  kingdom  but  our  humble 
wants  and  susceptible  hearts ;  the  Idea  of  merit,  therefore,  claiming  a 
reward  as  its  due,  is  wholly  out  of  the  question.  The  reward  is  a  gra- ' 
clous  gift.     But  when  grace  has  admitted  us  into  the  kingdom,  our  par- 

*  This  agrees  very  well  with  the  point  of  time  to  which  we  have  refen-ed  the  Sermon 
on  the  Mount,  i.  e..  the  period  when  the  Pharisees  began  to  persecute  Christ  and  his  disci 
pies.  Moreover,  his  foresight  at  that  time  of  the  hatred  lie  would  excite,  and  the  persecu- 
tions his  followers  would  suffer,  combined  with  the  fact  that  throughout  the  discourse  there 
is  not  the  slightest  hint  of  a  purpose  to  triumph  over  his  foes  by  an  overwhelming  miracu- 
lous power — nay,  that  the  whole  spirit  of  the  discourse  is  opposed  to  such  a  purpose — 
agrees  very  well  with  his  anticipating,  at  the  time,  that  be  should  die  in  fulfilling  his 
railing. 

t  The  name  is  the  outward  sign  of  the  thing — its  manifestation  and  confirmation. 

t  Indicated  in  KXrjQiiaovrat,  especially. 

§  Cf.  De  Wetle's  excellent  remarks  on  Matt.,  v.,  12. 


223  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

ticipation  in  its  "  blessedness"  depends  upon  our  bearing  in  the  strug- 
gles to  which  our  membership  in  the  kingdom  exposes  us  on  earth. 
The  "reward,"  therefore,  designates  the  relation  between  the  Divine 
gifts  and  our  subjective  worth ;  the  gifts  are  proportioned  to  the  work 
which  the  members  of  the  kingdom,  as  such,  have  to  do*  It  is  obvi- 
ous, then,  that  no  external  reward  is  meant — no  acting  with  a  view  to 
such — for  these  ideas  are  foreign  to  the  nature  of  the  kingdom  of  God 
itself. 

What,  then,  is  the  "  reward  1"  It  is,  that  the  wants  of  our  higher 
nature  shall  be  satisfied  ;  that  we  shall  enjoy  perfect  communion  with 
God,  and,  in  consequence,  perfect  knowledge  of  him  ;  that  we  shall 
have,  and  exercise,  the  perfect  privilege  of  sons  of  God.  It  is  nothing 
but  the  perfect  realization  of  what  is  implied  in  "  the  kingdom,"  "  the 
children  of  God,"  "  the  Divine  life."  In  our  struggles  for  the  king- 
dom, we  must  direct  our  eye  to  the  goal  of  the  consummation  ;  must 
feel  that  we  struggle  for  no  vain  ideal.  The  two  expressions  "  reward 
in  Jieaven,''  and  "  inherit  the  earth,"  mutually  illustrate  each  other;  the 
latter  is  to  be  a  sjiiritiial,  and  not  a  carnal,  Jewish,  world-dominion  ; 
the  former  does  not  betoken  a  locality,  but  a  perfected  communion  of 
life  with  God,  i.  e.,  a  Divine  life  brought  to  perfection. 

II.    Influence  of  the  Members  of  the   Kingdom  of  God  in  Renewing 

the  World. 

§  152.   The  Disciples  of  Christ  the  "  Light''  and  "  Salt""  of  the  Earth. 

Christ  then  points  out  to  his  disciples  the  regenerating  influence 
which  the  qualities  before  described  must  exert  wlien  exhibited  to  the 
world.  His  followers  are  "  the  light  of  the  world^'  which,  where  it 
exists,  cannot  be  hid,  but  must  shine  forth.  They  are  to  become  "  tltc 
salt""  of  mankind.  As  salt  preserves  from  deqay  and  corruption  every 
thing  to  which  it  is  ajjplied,  so  Christians  arc  to  incite  mankind  to  live 
according  to  their  high  destiny  ;  are  to  impart  freshness  to  humanity, 
and  to  preserve  it  from  the  corruption  into  which  it  naturally  passes, 
by  the  power  of  their  higher  principle  of  life.  The  course  of  the  hu- 
man race,  apart  from  Christianity,  is  always  downward  ;  all  its  civili- 
zation ends  in  barbarism.  It  is  for  Christians  to  preserve  the  spiritual 
life  of  mankind  fresh  and  undecayed. 

But  if  the  salt  lose  its  saltness — becomes  stale  and  worthless — where- 
with shall  it  be  salted  ?  Wherewith  shall  the  Divine  life  be  preserved 
in  those  to  whom  Christianity,  the  source  of  the  reanimating,  freshening 
power,  has  been  dead  1  In  that  case,  those  that  should  stand  upon  the 
highest  point  of  imman  developement  will  sink  to  the  lowest ;  it  is 
good  for  nothing,  hut  to  he  cast  out  and  trodden  under  foot  of  men. 

*  Cf.  Nitzck's  striking  observations  on  the  Divine  Justice  and  Rewards,  Si/stcm  dor 
Christiichen  Lehre,  p.  115,  2d  ed. 


SERMON  ON  THE  MOUNT.  225 

gation,  Christ  says,  "Blessed  are  the  poor  in  spirit,  for  theirs  is  the  kiiig- 
dom  of  Jieaven.  Happy  are  they  who  feel  the  spiritual  wretchedness 
of  the  Theoci'atlc  nation ;  who  long  after  the  true  riches  of  the  kingdom ; 
who  have  not  stifled  the  higher  cravings  of  their  souls  by  worldly  de- 
lights, by  confidence  in  their  Jewish  descent,  by  the  pride  of  Pharisaic 
righteousness  and  wisdom;  but  are  conscious  of  their  spiritual  poverty, 
of  their  lack  of  the  true  riches  of  the  Spirit  and  the  kingdom."*  Such 
are  they  to  whom  the  kingdom  of  God  belongs;  "theirs,''''  says  Christ, 
"/s  the  kingdom  of  heaven  ;"  as,  in  certain  respects,  a  present  possession. 

(2.) 

As  the  pride  of  the  Phaiisee  is  joined  with  sternness,  so  poverty  of 
spirit  is  attended  by  meekness  and  humility.  In  the  Sermon,  "  blessed 
are  the  poor  in  spiriV  is  followed  byf  "  Messed  are  the  meek,  for  they 
shall  inherit  the  earth.^''  A  remarkable  contrast:  Dominion  is  promised 
to  that  precise  disposition  of  heart  which  is  most  averse  to  it.  A  con- 
trast, too,  which  serves  to  point  out  the  peculiar  kind  of  world-dominion 
promised,  as  distinguished  from  the  prevailing  Jewish  ideas  on  the  sub- 
ject. According  to  the  latter,  the  sceptre  of  the  Messianic  reign  over 
the  heathen  nations  was  to  be  a  sceptre  of  iron ;  according  to  the  former, 
the  "gentle-spirited""  are  to  obtain  possession  of  the  earth. 

It  is  true,  the  expression,  "shall  inherit  the  earth,"  is  included  (like 
the  other  beatitudes)  in  the  more  general  one,  "  theirs  is  the  kingdom 
of  heaven ;"  it  is  doubtless  true,  also,  that  the  phrase  was  not  uncom- 
mon among  the  Jews  ;  but  we  are  not,  therefore,  obliged  to  conclude 
that  the  thought  involved  in  it  is  only  the  general  one  of  "  the  blessed- 
ness of  the  kingdom  of  God."  The  expression  has  a  significance 
of  its  own.  The  "  inheritance  of  the  earth"  is  that  world-dominion 
which  Christians,  as  organs  of  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  are  ever  more  and 
more  to  obtain,  as  the  kingdom  of  God  shall  win  increasing  sway  over 

*  "  Poverty  of  spirit"  includes  all  that  we  liave  here  expressed.  De  IVetle  (in  HeidM. 
Studien,vo\.m.,-pt.  2,  in  his  Comment,  de  mnrte  Jesu  Chrisli  cxpiutorui,  in  his  Ckris/licke 
Littetilehre,  pt.  i.,  p.  246,  and  in  his  Commentary,  in  loc.)  has  done  inueh  to  develope  the 
idea  genetically.  He  has  rightly  called  attention  to  the  derivation  of  the  phrase  from  the 
Old  Testament  views.  "  The  Immhle  citizen  of  the  fallen  Theocracy,  deeply  feehng  the 
misery  of  the  Theocratic  nation,  bruised  in  spirit,  and  hoping  only  in  God,  is  ' ponr  in 
spirit,'  in  contrast  with  the  haughty  blasphemer,  who  has  no  such  feeling:  U.!^,  IVDN,  in 
contrast  with  Pp"^  j  Isa.,  Lxi.,  1  "  Applying  this  spiritually,  with  reference  to  the  inner  life, 
we  naturally  infer  that  the  nTuxot  rio  -nvtvuaTi  are  "those  who  feel  their  wajit  of  that  whicli 
alone  can  satisfy  and  enrich  the  Spirit."  and  so  all  the  rest  that  we  have  intimated.  The 
difference  in  tliese  explanations — easily  harmonized — consists  only  in  the  reference  of  the 
idea  to  its  genetic  historical  developement  in  the  one,  and  to  the  objective  Christian  mean- 
ing, which  holds  good  for  all  ages.  Conf  Jdmts  (i.,  9.  10).  whose  epistle  accords  in  many 
points  with  the  Sennon  on  the  Mount,  and  follows  its  stand-point  in  the  developement  of 
Christianity'. 

t  In  the  order  of  the  Beatitudes,  I  follow  the  text  of  Lachmann,  which  gives  them  iu  a 
corLnesion  not  only  logical,  but  corresponding  with  their  aim  as  instruction. 

P 


22G  SECOND  GENERAL  3IINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

mankind  and  the  relations  of  society,  until,  in  its  final  consummation, 
the  whole  eartli  shall  own  its  dominion ;  and  the  Power  which  is  to 
gain  this  world-dominion  is  Meeka'ess  ;  the  quiet  might  of  gentleness 
it  is  with  which  God's  kingdom  is  to  subjugate  the  world. 

(3.) 
Christ,  then,  further  developes  the  characteristics  of  poverty  of  spirit 
in  the  beatitude  :  "Blessed  are  they  that  mourn  (that  are  conscious  of 
inward  woe),  for  they  shall  be  comforted."  That  this  mourning  is  not 
grief  for  mere  outward  afflictions,  appears  from  the  next :  "Blessed  are 
they  which  do  hunger  and  thirst  afoer  righteousness,  for  they  shall  be 
filled"  (shall  find  their  wants  supplied  in  the  communion  of  the  king- 
dom of  God). 

§  150.  MoralResultof  Entering  the  Kingdom  of  Godj  viz. :  The  "■Pure 
in  Heart  see  God.'" 

The  preceding  beatitudes  point  out  the  moral  requisites  for  entering 
into  the  kingdom  of  God  ;  but  it  must  not  be  inferred  that  they  are 
demanded  only  on  entrance  into  it,  and  no  longer.  Rather,  as  our 
appropriation  of  the  kingdom  can  never  be  a  finished  act  while  we 
remain  on  earth,  must  its  moral  requisites  continue,  nay,  continually 
grow  in  strength.  We  can  discern  already,  in  their  connexion,  the 
peculiar  essence  of  Christianity.  The  Christian  is  conscious  of  no 
moral  or  spiritual  ability  of  his  own,  needing  only  to  be  rightly  ap- 
plied to  gain  the  wished-for  end ;  on  the  contrary,  he  feels  that  he 
has,  of  himself  nothing  but  want  and  weakness,  insufficiency  and 
wretchedness.  Already  Christ  announces  redemption  as  his  own 
peculiar  work. 

Presupposing,  then,  that  those  who  are  endowed  with  these  requi- 
sites will  enter  his  kingdom,  satisfy  their  spiritual  need,  and  share  in 
his  saving  power,  Christ  describes  them,  in  consequence,  as  " j'ure  in 
heart"  (pure,  however,  not  according  to  the  standard  of  legal  piety). 
And  to  those  who  possess  this  purity  he  promises  that  "  they  shall  sec 
God."  They  shall  have  perfect  communion  with  Him,  and  that  com- 
plete and  intuitive  knowledge  of  his  nature  which,  founded  in  sucli 
communion,  forms  the  bliss  of  everlasting  life. 

This  promise  refers,  it  is  true,  to  that  full  communion  with  Gon 
which  shall  be  realized  in  eternal  life,  or  in  the  consummation  of  the 
kingdom  of  God  only.  But  this  by  no  means  excludes  its  application 
to  tJiat  participation  in  the  kingdom  which  begins  during  our  caithly 
life;  just  as  the  preceding  promises  were  to  be  gradually  and  progres- 
sively fulfilled  until  their  consummation.  The  prominent  connexion  of 
thought  is,  that  the  knowledge  of  Divine  things  must  spring  from  the 
life,  from  that  purity  of  heart  which  fits  men  for  communion  with  God; 


SERMON  ON  THE  MOUNT.  031 

tory  stand-point ;  it  will,  on  the  other  hand,  be  the  "  destroying''''  of  all 
that  was,  in  itself,  only  preparatory.  In  pointing  to  this  consummation 
of  the  kingdom  of  God  as  the  final  "  fulfilling"  of  all,  Christ  at  the 
same  time  fixes  the  final  end  for  the  fulfilment  of  all  the  promises  con- 
nected with  the  beatitudes.  Thus  the  connexion  with  the  words  spo- 
ken before  is  closely  preserved.* 

(3.) 

Passing  from  the  Old  Testament  in  general  to  the  "  law"  in  particu- 
lar, and  applying  to  it  the  general  proposition  that  he  had  advanced, 
Christ  commands  his  disciples  (v.  19,  20)  to  fulfil  the  law  in  a  far  high- 
er sense  than  those  did  who  were  at  that  time  considered  patterns  of 
righteousness.  In  proportion  as  each  fulfilled  the  law  was  he  to  have 
a  higher  or  a  lower  place  in  the  developement  of  the  kingdom  (v.  19). 
The  principle  of  life  which  they  all  possessed  in  common  (the  essen- 
tial requisite  for  fulfilling  any  of  the  demands  of  the  sermon)  by  no 
means  precluded  diffei-ences  of  degree  ;  it  might  penetrate  one  more 
thoroughly  than  another,  and  display  itself  in  a  more  (or  less)  complete 
fulfilling  of  the  law.  Christ  illustrates  the  same  doctrine  in  the  para- 
ble of  the  Sower. 

Such,  then,  and  so  superior  is  the  fulfilling  of  the  law  which  Christ 
requires  of  all  who  would  belong  to  his  kingdom :  Except  your  righ- 
teousness shall  exceed  the  righteousness  of  the  scribes  and  Pharisees,  ye 
shall  in  no  case  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  Heaven,] 

■^  154.  "  FulfiUing  of  the  Law'"  in  the  Higher  Se?ise. — Gene7-al  Contrast 
between  the  Juridical  and  Moral  Stand-po'aits. 

In  verses  22-48  Christ  illustrates,  in  a  number  of  special  examples, 
the  sense  in  which  the  law  was,  not  "  destroyed,"  but  "  fulfilled" 
through  him  ;  also  the  sense  in  which  the  members  of  his  kingdom 
were  to  signalize  themselves  by  zeal  in  fulfilling  the  law ;  and  also  (but 
here  subordinately)  the  difference  between  their  righteousness — an- 
swering to  their  position  in  the  new  developement  of  the  Divine  king- 
dom— and  the  seeming  righteousness  01  the  Pharisees. 

In  these  illustrations  he  contrasts  the  eternal  Theocratic  law  with 
the  political  Theocratic  law;  the  absolute  law  with  the  particular  law 
of  Moses.  Although  the  former  lay  at  the  fijundation  of  the  latter,  it 
could  not,  in  that  limited  and  contracted  system,  unfold  and  display  it- 

*  By  assuming  this  relation  to  the  law  and  the  prophets,  Christ  gave  himself  out  as 
Messiah.  How  untenable,  then,  is  Strauas's  assertion  that  at  that  time  Jesus  had  not  de- 
cidedly presented  himself  as  Messiah !  We  have  shown  tliat  the  passage  is  too  closely 
bound  up  with  the  organism  of  the  whole  sermon  to  be  considered  an  interpolation. 

t  The  yap  in  verse  20  obviously  introduces  a  coniirmation  of  the  preceding  verse ;  and 
this  opposes  Olshausen' s  view  of  the  connexion,  although  he  has  well  marked  the  distinc- 
tion between  verses  19  and  20. 


2Z2  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

self;  and  it  could  not  be  fully  developed  until  the  shell,  the  restraining 
form,  which  had  cribbed  and  confined  the  spirit,  was  broken  and  de- 
stroyed* The  opposition  is  between  the  law  as  bearing  only  upon  the 
overt  act,  and  the  law  as  bearing  upon  the  heart,  and  fulfilled  in  it ;  be- 
tween the  juridical  and  the  moral  stand-point. 

We  infer,  then,  as  a  rule  in  intei-preting  the  following  separate  pre- 
cepts, that  outward  acts  are  to  be  taken  as  vivid  exhibitions  of  a  re- 
quired inward  disposition,  and  are  to  be  understood  literally  only  when 
they  are  the  necessary  expression  of  such  a  state  of  heart. 

§  155.  Fulfilling  of  the  haw  in  the  Higher  Sense. — Particular  Exam- 
ples, viz.,  (1.)  Murder;  (2.)  Adultery  ;  (3.)  Divorce;  (4.)  Perjury; 
(5.)  Revenge;   (6.)   National  Exclusivcness. 

(1.)  The  law  condemns  the  murderer  to  death.  But  the  Gospel  sen- 
tences even  him  who  is  angry]  with  his  brother.  The  passion  which, 
when  full-blown,  causes  mui'der,  is  punished  in  the  bud  of  I'evengeful 
feeling,  whether  concealed  in  the  heart  or  shown  in  abusive  words| 
(V.  22). 

*  I  agree  with  the  Greek  and  Socinian  interpreters  in  thinking  that  Christ  means  here 
not  merely  the  Pharisaic  interpretations  of  the  law,  but  also  the  legal  stand-point  in  gen- 
eral. This  follows  necessarily,  (1)  from  the  connexion  as  we  have  unfolded  it;  (2)  from 
tlie  fact  that  he  quotes  the  commandments  in  their  literal  Old  Testament  form.  (Even 
"  thou  shall  hate  thy  enemy"  (v.  43),  though  not  found  literally  in  the  commandment,  is  im- 
plied in  the  preceding:  positive  commandment,  as  limited  by  the  particular  Theocratic  stand- 
point) ;  (.3)  because  ippiOn  toi?  ip\aiots  (v.  33)  cannot  well  be  interpreted  otherwise  than 
"  it  has  been  said  to  the  men  of  old''  (the  fathers,  hence  during  the  Mosaic  promulgation 
of  the  law).  Had  Christ  referred  to  the  statutes  of  the  elders  (which  would  not  agree  so 
well  with  the  whole  form  of  the  expression  either),  he  would  have  used  -^pcaBvTepots,  as  also 
7>e  Wette  acknowledges.  Tholuck's  argument,  of  an  antithesis  between  apxaion  and  (ya 
is  not  to  the  point ;  the  connexion  does  not  require  such  an  antithesis.  The  ojjposition  is 
iH)t  ill  the  subject  of  the  commandment,  but  in  its  conception.  Christ  recognized  the  voice 
of  God  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  Moses  as  sent  of  God ;  but  he  wished  to  oppose  the/u/- 
liUing  form  of  the  new  legislation  to  the  narrow  and  deficient  form  of  Old  Testament  le- 
gislation, which  belonged  to  a  temporary  and  preparatory  epoch.  Had  Christ  had  the  sub- 
ject of  the  commandment  in  view,  rois  apxaiot;  would  naturally  have  preceded  ippedrj ;  vrhile 
the  present  collocation  of  the  words  indicates  that  the  opposition  is  instituted  between 
what  was  said  in  earlier  times  and  what  teas  then  said  by  him.  The  prominence  that  he 
•a.s.signs  to  tlie  Pharisaical  conception  and  application  of  the  law  connects  very  well  with 
this  opposition  to  the  old  law  in  general ;  for  the  Pharisees  especially  refused  to  admit  the 
."piril  to  pass  from  the  old  law  and  find  its  fulliknent  in  the  new,  but  adhered  to  the  leUer 
in  a  one-sided  and  exclusive  way.  Pharisaism,  in  a  word,  was  the  culmination  of  the  old 
Nt.'ind-point,  adhering  to  the  letter,  and  estranged  from  the  spirit. 

t  I  must  agree  with  those  who  reject  ciKn  (v.  22).  Thus  to  lessen  the  force  of  the  law 
certainly  does  not  harmonize  with  the  connexion. 

J  It  seems  to  me  that  the  words  "  'Ci  6'  di'  e'irrri  rip  <Wc>(/).p  aVTOv  ■  paku,  ei'oxoS  carat  rio  ourti'p'V" 
should  be  taken  away  from  this  passage.  Apart  from  these,  the  connexion  is  perfect  and 
obvious.  Kpiaii=^iidgmeHt,  condemyialion,  its  common  meaning  in  the  New  Testament; 
and  so  yUvva,  with  another  word.  Degrees  of  violation  of  the  Theocratic  law  nowhere  ap- 
pear in  this  connexion  ;  on  the  contraiy,  it  teaches  that  the  smallest  violation,  as  well  as  the 
greatest,  involves  a  disposition  of  heart  opposed  to  the  khigdom  of  God,  which  demands 
holiness  of  heart,     ileviling  is  purposely  put  side  by  side  with  murder,  because  the  dispo- 


SERMON  ON  THE  MOUNT.  229 

Christ  knew  that  the  new  element  of  life  which,  through  him,  was 
given  to  humanity,  had  power  to  keep  it  ever  fi'esh  and  living;  but  he 
knew  also  the  impure  influences  to  which  it  would  be  liable.  These 
words  of  his  declare  the  fate  of  Christianity,  whenever"  it  degenerates 
into  dead  forms  and  outward  show.  History  affords  the  fullest  and 
saddest  commentary  upon  this  prophetic  passage. 

III.   The  Law  of  Christian  Life  the  Fuliilment  of  the   Old  Law. 

§  153.  Fulfilling  of  the  Law  and,  the  Prophets  :  (1.)  General  View  ; 
(2.)  particular  Exposition ;  (3.)  Demand  for  a  Higher  Obedience 
than  that  (f  the  Pharisees.     (Matt.,  v.,  17-20.) 

After  commanding  his  disciples  to  become  the  "  salt"  of  the  earth, 
and  to  "  let  their  light  s,o  shine  before  men  that  they  might  see  their 
good  works,  and  glorify  their  Father  in  heaven,"  it  remained  for  him 
to  set  vividly  before  them,  by  specific  illustrations,  the  mode  in  which 
they  were  to  let  their  light  shine  through  their  actions;  which  would 
distinguish  them  palpably  from  those  who  then  passed  for  holy  men 
among  the  Jews. 

This  gave  him  occasion  to  refute  the  charge  spread  abroad  by  the 
Pharisees,  that  he  aimed  to  subvert  the  authority  of  the  law.  But, 
instead  of  confining  himself  to  a  mere  refutation,  he  took  a  course 
conforming  with  the  dignity  of  his  character,  and  justified  himself  in  a 
positive  way,  by  unfolding  the  relation  in  which  his  New  Creation 
stood  to  the  stand-point  of  the  Old  Covenant,  He  incorporated  this, 
moreover,  very  closely  with  the  practical  purpose  of  the  whole  discourse 
(v.  17,  seq.).  He  characterizes  the  new  law  of  life  by  distinct  and 
separ-ate  traits.  He  proclaims  the  new  law  as  the  fulfilment  of  the  old. 
For  since  the  old  law  proceeds  from  the  commandment  "  to  love  Grou 
above  all  things,  and  our  neighbour  as  ourselves,"  it  contains  the 
eternal  law  of  the  kingdom  of  God  ;  and  only  where  love  rules  the 
whole  life  can  we  secure  this  object,  which  the  whole  religious  law  of 
the  Old  Testament  aimed  at,  but  could  not  realize.  "  On  these  tico 
commandments  (says  Christ,  Matt.,  xxii.,  40)  hang  all  the  law  and  the 
prophets,"  i.  e.,  the  whole  Old  Testament.  They  could  not  be  ful- 
filled from  the  Old  Testament  stand-point,  because  men  needed,  in 
order  to  fulfil  them,  a  new  life,  proceeding  from  the  spirit  of  love; 
and  this  Christ  came  to  impart.  He  presupposes  its  existence  in  those 
for  whom  he  communicates  the  new  law. 

Moreover,  although  the  everlastitig  Theocratic  law  could  be  derived 
from  the  two  commandments  specified,  yet  its  spirit,  tied  down  to  the 
stand-point  of  the  political  Theocracy,  and  cribbed  in  its  contracted 
forms   could  not  attain  its  free  and  full  developement.     But  Christ,  by 


230  SECOiND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

freeing  it  frum  this  bondage  of  forms,  brought  it  into  complete  devel- 
opement,  not  only  in  the  consciousness,  but  in  the  practical  life.  In 
this  respect,  then,  he  fulfilled  the  law ;  and  this  was  the  object  for 
which  he  appeared.* 

(2.) 

Christ  begins,  therefore,  by  saying.  Think  not  that  I  am  covie  to  de- 
stroy the  law  and  the  prophets  ;  I  am  not  come  to  destroy,  hut  to  fulfill 
By  this  we  are  to  understand  the  whole  of  the  Old  Testament  religion  ; 
he  came  to  annul  neither  of  its  chief  divisions,  as  his  general  mission 
Avas  (last  clause  of  v.  17|)  "  not  to  destroy,  but  to  fulfil,"  He  adds,  in 
a  still  stronger  averment  (v.  18),  that  not  one  jot  or  tittle  of  the  law 
should  lose  its  validity,  but  that  all  have  its  fulfilment,  until  the  con- 
summation of  the  kingdom  of  God.§  This  last  will  be  the  great 
"  fulfilment,"  for  which  all  previous  stages  of  the  kingdom  were  but 
preparatory. 

Here,  again,  it  is  shown  that,  in  this  sense,  "destroying"  and  "ful- 
filling" are  correlative  ideas.  The  consummation  of  the  kingfdom  will 
be  the  '■'■fulfilling'''  of  all  which  was  contained,  in  germ,  in  the  prepara- 

*  Cf.  p.  91,  92. 

t  Gfrorer  asserts  ("  Heilige  Sage,"  ii.,  84,  seq.)  that  these  words  were  not  Christ's,  but 
were  more  likely  put  into  his  mouth  by  the  later  Judaists  in  their  controversies  with  Paul; 
an  opinion  adopted  also  by  Dr.  Roeth  [Epiat.  ad  Hehr.  non  ad,  Hebrceos,  scd  ad  Chrutiancs 
genere  gentiles  Scriptam  esse,  Francof.,  1836,  p.  214).  The  former  writer  thinks  that  these 
striking  words,  had  they  existed,  would  have  been  used  against  Paul  by  the  strenuous 
advocates  of  the  continued  validity  of  the  Mosaic  law ;  which,  he  infers,  they  did  7ioi  do, 
from  the  silence  of  Paul's  epistles  on  the  subject.  We  are  compelled  directly  to  contradict 
this  assertion;  it  is  refuted  sufficiently  by  the  close  connexion  of  the  words  with  the  current 
of  thought  in  the  context.  Paul  understood  their  import  too  well  to  find  any  embarrassment 
from  them  in  his  controversies  with  the  Judaists.  If  they  were  quoted  against  him,  hu 
refuted  the  false  use  made  of  them  by  his  developemeut  of  the  whole  doctrine,  rather  than 
by  separate  and  detailed  quotation,  as  was  his  custom  in  controversy. 

t  De  Welte,  in  explaining  the  17tli  verse,  attempts  to  prove,  from  Matt.,  vii.,  12,  and 
xxii.,  40,  that  the  "  law  and  prophets"  were  conceived,  also,  as  the  source  of  the  moral  laic, 
and  deems  that  the  words  are  here  to  be  taken  only  in  that  sense,  with  no  reference  at  all 
to  the  prophetic  element  of  the  Old  Testament.  I  cannot  agree  with  him.  Even  the 
passages  which  he  adduces  do  not  refer  exclusively  to  the  moral  contents  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, but  to  the  Old  Testament  in  its  whole  nature  and  extent.  Christ  designates— as  tlie 
end  and  aim  to  which  the  whole  Old  Testament  tends — only  the  quintessence  of  the  whole 
Theocracy,  religious  as  well  as  moral,  viz.:  the  spirit  of  love ;  as  also  the  end  and  aim 
of  Redemption  is  to  make  love  the  ruling  principle  of  man's  nature.  De  Wctle  argues 
that  "no  one  of  his  hearers  could  have  imagined  that  Christ  wished  to  be  received  as 
Messiah  in  opposition  to  all  the  prophecies  of  the  Prophets;  so  he  speaks  afterward  only 
of  the  fulfilling  of  the  law."  Now  the  question  is,  was  Christ  speaking  against  a  misunder- 
standing of  his  disciples,  or  against  an  accusation  of  his  enemies  ?  If  the  latter,  as  we 
suppose,  he  had  good  call  to  prove  that  his  ministry  was  opposed  neither  to  the  "law"  nor 
to  the  "  prophets,"  and  that  he  would  show  himself  to  be  Messiah  by  fullilling  both.  His 
subsequently  making  one  part  (the  law)  particularly  prominent  is  no  proof  that  he  had  not 
both  in  his  mind  bcfire.  Moreover,  even  De  WvtlcXwiii  to  admit  that  the  prophetic  element 
is  alluded  to  in  v.  18.  We  infer,  therefore,  that  both  ''law"  and  "  jiroijliots"  are  referrc.l 
to  from  the  begimiiug.  §  Cf.  Tholuck  on  v.  18. 


SERMON  ON  THE  MOUNT.  235 

48).  And  the  perfect  love  of  God  does  not  exclude  His  enemies.  How 
perfect,  indeed,  must  His  love  be,  to  seek  the  redemption  even  of  His 
enemies ! 

IV.    True  Religion  contrasted  with  the  Mock  Piety  of  the  Pharisees. 

§  156.  (1.)  Alms,  Prayer,  Fasting  ;  (2.)  Rigid  Judgment  of  Self ,  Mild 
Judgment  of  others  ;  (3.)  Test  of  Sincerity  in  Seeking  after  Righteous- 
ness.    (Matt.,  vi.,  1-18;  vii.,  1-5.) 

(1.) 

After  setting  forth  the  opposition  between  legal  and  true  holiness, 
Christ  passes  on  to  contrast  the  latter  with  the  false  spiritual  tendencies 
at  that  time  existing ;  to  contrast  that  piety  which  attaches  no  im- 
portance either  to  its  own  works  or  to  the  show  of  them,  with  the 
mock  religion  of  the  Pharisees,  which  did  every  thing  for  show.  It  is 
the  contrast,  in  a  word,  between  being  and  seeming ;  and  no  words 
could  express  it  more  strikingly  than  "  lohen  thou  doest  thine  alms,  let 
not  thy  left  hand  know  what  thy  right  hand  doeth.  So  far  from  doing 
good  that  others  may  see  it,  thou  must  not  even  think  of  it  as  thy  own 
work ;  do  it,  in  childish  simplicity,  from  thy  loving  spirit,  as  if  thou 
couldst  not  do  otherwise."  This  principle  Christ  applies  to  three 
separate  acts,  in  which  the  Pharisees  were  specially  wont  to  make  a 
pious  display,  viz.:  Alms,  prayer,  and  fasting*  (vi.,  1-18). 

(2.) 
The  sin  which  is  nextt  condemned  (vii.,  1-5)  springs  from  the  same 
root  as  the  one  just  mentioned.  The  Pharisees  judged  others  severely, 
but  were  quite  indulgent  to  themselves,  and,  indeed,  never  rightly  exam 
ined  themselves.  He  that  knows  what  true  righteousness  is,  and  feels 
his  own  want  of  it,  will  be  a  rigid  censor  of  his  own  life,  but  a  mild 
and  gentle  judge  of  others.  ["  And  lohy  heholdest  thou  the  mote  that  is 
in  thy  brother'' s  eye,  hut  considerest  not  the  beam  that  is  in  thine  own  1 
Thou  hypocrite !  first  cast  out  the  beam  that  is  in  thine  own  eye,  and 
then  shall  thou  see  clearly  to  cast  the  mote  out  of  thy  brother's.^'] 

(3.) 
The  Saviour  then|  gives  (vii.,  12)  a  criterion  to  distinguish  true  from 

*  Since  Christ  specifies  these  three,  in  order  to  apply  to  them  the  general  principle  of 
V.  1  (rfiv  iiKaioavvrjv  fii)  ttouIv  €^n;poaOev  t&v  avOpunrwv),  we  infer  that  it  was  foreign  to  his 
purpose  to  give  an  exposition  of  the  nature  of  prayer  here,  which  coufinns  our  view  that 
the  "  Lord's  Prayer"  is  not  here  in  its  proper  chronological  connexion. 

t  Matt.,  vii.,  1,  stands  in  a  close  logical  connexion  with  vi.,  18,  and  the  preceding  verses ; 
and  is  also  given  by  Luke,  proving  that  it  belongs  to  the  original  body  of  the  discourse  ; 
but  vi.,  19-34  {not  given  by  Luke  in  this  connexion]  appears  as  obviously  not  so.  So  of 
5-11,  below. 

I  The  ovv  in  verse  12..  as  well  as  the  course  of  thought,  connect  it  with  v.  5. 


236  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

Pharisaic  righteousness.  "  Therefore,  all  things  whatsoever  ye  would 
tJiat  men  should  do  unto  you,  do  ye  also  unto  them  ;  for  this  is  the  law 
and  the  prophets."  (If  you  are  striving  sincerely  after  the  essence  of 
righteousness,  you  will  place  yourself  in  the  condition  of  others,  and 
act  towards  thera  as  you  would  wish  thera,  in  such  case,  to  have  acted 
towards  you.) 

It  was  certainly  not  Christ's  purpose  here  to  set  up  a  rule  of  morals 
contradictory  to  the  whole  spirit  of  the  rest  of  the  sermon,  which  places 
the  seat  of  true  morality  in  the  heart.  Mere  outward  action,  according 
to  this  rule,  might  spring  from  diverse  dispositions,  e.  g.,  the  mere  pru- 
dence of  selfishness  might  lead  us  to  observe  it,  in  order  to  get  like  for 
like.  But,  placing  it  in  connexion  with  what  has  gone  before,  and  ma- 
king love  the  mainspring  of  our  actions,  the  rule  affords  a  touchstone  of 
their  character.  And  when  our  actions  stand  this  test,  Christ  says  that 
"the  law  and  the  jyrophets  [i.  c,  the  life  and  essence  of  piety  to  which 
they  point)  are  fulfilled  ;"  for,  as  he  elsewhere  says,  "  love  is  the  fulfil- 
ling of  the  law." 

V.    Exliortations    and    Warnings   to   the    Children  of  the    Kingdom. 

§  157.  Exhortation  to  Self-denial. —  Caution  against  Seducers.     (Matt., 

vii.,  13-24.) 

Christ  had  now  pointed  out  the  moral  requisites_/or  entrance  into  his 
kingdom,  and  the  moral  qualities  which  must  mark  its  members.  He 
now  warns  them  (v.  13)  against  the  delusion  of  expecting  to  secure  its 
blessings  in  any  easier  way  than  he  had  pointed  out,  or  hoping  to  avoid 
struggle  and  self-denial  ;*  and  cautions  them  against  false  teachers,  who 
would  lead  them  into  such  delusions,  and  draw  them  out  of  the  right 
way.  First,  be  gives  a  warning  against  such  as  shall  falsely  pretend  to 
a  Divine  call  as  teachers  and  guides,  inspired  by  self-seeking  alone. 
"  Wolves  in  sheep's  clothing,t  their  evil  fruits,  proofs  of  their  evil 
hearts,  distinguish  them  from  genuine  prophets  of  God"  (v.  15,  20). 
This  warning  was  strikingly  applicable  at  that  time  of  out-breaking 
battle  with  the  hierarchical  and  Pharisaic  party. 

The  general  proposition,  that  the  state  of  the  heart  must  be  shown 
by  the  "  fruits,"  is  then  applied  to  all  believers  (v.  21-23).     Not  every 

*  Matt.,  vii.,  13-14,  describe  tlie  difficultks  of  the  way,  and  join  closely  to  what  precedes. 
The  figure  of  the  "  gate,"  &c.,  is  more  aptly  introduced  in  Luke,  xiii.,  24,  25,  and  it  might  be 
supposed  that  the  author  of  the  Greek  Matthew  had  transferred  the  passage  to  this  con- 
nexion from  the  actual  one  in  which  Christ  uttered  it.  But  so  olrvious  a  figure  as  the 
"gate"  and  the  "way"  may  have  been  used  repeatedly  by  Christ ;  and  in  these  two  i)la- 
ccs,  moreover,  there  is  a  difference  in  its  application.  In  Luke,  the  "  gate"  is  to  be  entered 
before  the  Master  has  closed  it;  in  Matt.,  it  is  "the  wide  gate  and  the  broad  way,  wiiich 
mq.ny  see;  the  narrow  gate  and  the  narrow  way,  wliicli  few  find."  In  the  former  the 
thought  is,  "  that  few  are  willing  to  undergo  the  necessary  labours  and  struggles  to  enter 
the  kingdom ;"  in  the  latter,  "  the  majority  deceive  themselves  as  to  the  dillioulties  of  the 
task,"  &c.  t  Cf.  John,  x.,  1-5. 


SERMON  ON  THE  MOUNT.  233 

(2.)  The  law  of  the  particular  Theocracy  condemns  the  adulterer. 
But  the  law  of  Christ  condemns  the  germ  of  evil  passion  in  the  husband, 
as  the  source  of  adultery*  (v.  27). 

(3.)  As  Christ  thus  already  considers  marriage  as  the  union,  in  part, 
of  two  persons  of  different  sexes,  he  takes  occasion  to  develope  still 
further  his  opposition  to  the  stand-point  of  the  Mosaic  law  in  regard  to 
this  relation.t 

The  Mosaic  law,  intended  for  a  rude  people,  who  were  to  be  culti- 
vated by  degrees,  allowed  divorce ;  seeking  to  place  some  restraints, 
at  least,  upon  unlimited  wilfulness.  Political  legislation  must  adapt 
itself  to  the  matei-ial  on  which  it  has  to  act.J  But  the  law  of  Christ 
sets  forth  the  moral  idea  of  mari'iage  in  its  full  strictness,  and  demands 
that  its  communion  of  life  shall  be  indissoluble.  Nothing  but  the 
actual  adultery  of  one  of  the  parties  can  dissolve  the  tie,  and  leave  the 
innocent  one  at  liberty  to  marry.§ 

sition  that  inspires  the  former  leads,  when  further  expanded,  to  the  latter;  the  reviler  is  « 
murderer  before  that  bar  which  looks  only  at  the  heart.  A  gri-adation  between  faKa  and 
fiwpoj  violates  both  the  aim  and  connexion  of  the  discourse,  and  seems  entirely  unbecoming 
its  dignity.  Moreover,  we  should  then  have  to  look  for  a  gradation  in  the  punishment, 
which,  again,  is  inconsistent  with  the  connexion.  The  "  Sanhedrim"  brings  us  before  the 
Jewish  civil  jurisdiction — the  politico-Theocratical  stand-point — the  very  thing  to  which 
Christ  opposes  himself  throughout  the  discourse.  And  how  is  y'uvva,  in  that  case,  to  bo 
distinguislied  from  Kpiaii  ?  In  what  relation  does  the  mention  of  the  Sankedrhn  stand  to 
Kpioii  and  yuvva  ?  Things  entirely  incompatible  are  here  brought  together.  All  attempts 
to  solve  tlie  difBcalty  lead  to  forced  and  untenable  interpretation.  The  fact  that  paKa  means 
just  the  same  tiling  as  /(wpt,  confirms  the  supposition  that  the  clause  in  question  was  intro 
duced  by  the  Greek  translator  as  another  version  of  the  following,  and  original,  clause  in 
Matthew's  Hebrew. 

*  Verses  23-26  are  among  tliose  expressions  of  Christ  which  we  suppose  to  have  been 
uttered  elsewhei-e,  and  transferred  to  this  connexion  from  their  affinity  of  subject.  (Of.  v. 
25,  26,  with  Luke,  xii.,  58,  59.)  So  of  v.  29,  30;  Christ  is  ti'eating  of  the  mere  legislation, 
not  of  the  element  of  self-discipline  as  such. 

t  Pol.vgauiy  was  not  yet  wholly  forbidden  among  the  Jews,  as  appears  from  JosepJiux. 
S[ieaking  in  reference  to  the  polygamy  of  Herod,  he  says  :  Tzarpiov  -jclp  cv  Taino  -rrXtioatii  fifuv 
avvoiKc'iv  (ArchaeoL,  xviii.,  1,  2).  And  Justin  casts  up  to  the  Jewish  doctors  that,  even  in 
his  time,  "o'lnviS  koI  ixkxp^  vZv  koX  rcaaiipai  Kai  TrtiTct'xfii'  Vpiui  ;  «i'u?/c«f  eKaarov  cvyX'i'Povot"  (Dial., 
c.  Tryph.  Jud.,  ed.  Colon.,  3G3,  E).  Still  we  may  infer  that  the  Jewish  schools  in  Christ's 
time  recognized  monogamy  as  the  only  lawful  marriage,  from  his  saying  nothing  expressly 
on  the  subject,  while  the  precepts  that  he  delivers  presuppose  it. 

t  The  oKXtipoKapiia  Toij  Xaov.     Matt.,  xix.,  8. 

$  I  cannot  agree  with  those  who  would  make  this  law  an  outward  one  by  legislation ; 
the  discourse  aims  at  the  heart,  and  its  precepts  can  be  fulfilled  in  the  life  only  from  the 
heart.  They  hold  good  only  for  those  who  recognize  Christ  as  their  Lord  from  free  convic- 
tion, and  are  led  by  his  Spirit ;  and  who,  therefore,  find  in  them  only  the  outward  expres- 
sion of  the  inward  Spirit.  The  state  can  no  more  realize  these  laws  than  it  can  make 
Cluistians  or  create  holiness.  Its  laws  must  be  adapted  to  the  oKXripoKapiia  Toti  XaoB.  The 
attempt  to  accomplish,  by  legislative  sanction,  what  redemption  alone  can  do,  would  create 
a  sort  of  stunted,  Chinese  life,  but  nothing  better.  Precisely  because  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount  is  the  Magna  Charta  of  tlie  kingdom  of  God,  it  is  not  fit  for  a  state  law.  On  the 
other  hand,  I  differ  from  those  who  suppose  that  Christ  alluded  only  to  the  then  existing 
fona  of  Jewish  divorce,  which  did  not  require  legal  investigation  and  decision.  The  moral 
idea  which  Christ  developed  had  a  more  than  temporary  bearing. 


234  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

(4.)  The  Mosaic  law  prohibits  perjury,  and  maintains  the  sanctity  of 
oaths.  But  the  law  of  Christ  demands  that  yes  and  no  shall  take  the 
place  of  all  other  confirmation.  "  Whatsoever  is  more  than  these*  comcth 
of  evil^^  i.  e.,  testifies  to  a  want  of  that  disposition  of  heart  which  every 
member  of  his  kingdom  ought  to  possess ;  a  want  of  that  thorough 
truthfulness  which  makes  every  other  affirmation  superfluous,  and  of 
the  mutual  confidence  that  depends  upon  it. 

(5.)  The  Mosaic  law,  moreover,  corresponding  to  the  civil  law,  ad- 
mits of  retaliation,  like  for  like.  But  the  law  of  Christ  so  completely 
shuts  out  the  desire  of  revenge,  that  it  creates  in  its  subjects  a  disposi- 
tion to  suffer  all  injury  rather  than  to  return  evil  for  evil  (v.  39). 

(G.)  The  old  law  ezijoined  the  "love  of  one's  neighbour;"  but  none 
were  regarded  as  "  neighbours"  but  members  of  the  Theocratic  com- 
munity, and,  therefore,  the  law  implied  "  hatred"  of  the  enemieS/of  that 
community  as  enemies  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  The  law  of  Christ,. on 
the  contrary,  enjoins  love  without  limit  ;t  a  love  that  takes  into  its 
wide  embrace  enemies  and  persecutors,  yea,  even  those  who,  as  ene- 
mies of  the  kingdom  of  God,  persecute  its  members  ;  a  love  which  not 
only  impels  us  to  do  them  good,  but  is  so  absolutely  exclusive  of  even 
the  germ  of  hatred,  as  to  urge  us  to  ^;raj/  for  them.  The  children 
of  God   are  to  be,  like  their  heavenly  Father,  perfect  in  love  (v.  45, 

*  The  formulas  in  v.  34,  35,  36  (not  properly  oatlis,  as  they  do  not  take  God  to  witness) 
illustrate  still  more  forcibly  Christ's  purpose  to  banish  from  his  kingdom  every  affirmation 
but  ^es  and  no.  Had  he  not  mentioned  them,  his  hearers  miglit  have  thought  that  he  refer- 
red only  to  the  immediate  invocation  of  Jehovah  to  vritness,  which  all  pious  Jews  sought 
to  avoid,  and  instead  of  which  these  very  fonnulas,  which  helped  those  that  were  disposeil 
to  gloss  over  a  perjury,  were,  in  fact,  invented.  This  is  enough  to  refute  what  GiJschel  says 
{iiber  den,  Eid,  Berlin,  1837,  p.  118,  119),  in  order  to  prove  tliat  Christ's  precept  was  not 
directed  against  oaths  in  general.  There  was  no  necessity  that  he  should  define  the 
proper  sense  of  an  oath ;  every  body  understood  it ;  but  it  would  have  been  by  no  means 
so  obvious  to  his  hearers  that  he  condemned  also  the  common  fonnulas,  invented  out  of 
reverence  fbr  the  Divine  name  (P)dlo,  De  Special.  Legib.,  §  ] ).  He  condemns  them  especially 
for  the  reason  that  it  is  inconsistent  with  the  condition  of  dependent  creatures  to  appeal  to 
the  creature  in  confirming  an  averment.  There  remained  nothing  but  the  true  oath — the 
appeal  to  Almighty  God — and  this,  also,  he  forbade  ;  yes  aad  no  were  to  suffice.  Go^chel 
says  (p.  116),  "As  Christ  came  not  to  abolish,  but  to  fulfil  the  law,  the  law  of  the  oath  was 
not  to  be  abolished,  but  fulfilled."  Tme ;  just  as  the  law,  "Thou  shaU  not  kill,"  is  fulfilled 
by  avoiding  emotions  of  hatred;  -just  as  the  law  of  the  Sabbath  is  fulfilled  in  consecrating 
every  day  to  God.  So  yes  and  no  are  bonds  as  sacred  for  the  Christian  as  an  oath  to  other 
men. 

t  The  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  (as  Riickeri  has  remarked)  contains  many  passages, 
the  germs  of  which  are  to  be  found  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  Cf  iv.,  8-13;  vi.,  7  ;  vii., 
10.  Paul  may  also  have  boiTowed  from  it  these  words  of  Christ,  which  were  preserved  for 
us  only  by  liis  means,  Acts,  xx.,  35,  "  //  is  more  blessed  to  ^ive  than  to  receive."  This  say- 
ing expresses  the  disjwsition  which,  in  Matt.,  v.,  40-42,  is  set  forth  in  outward  acts;  the 
very  nature  of  love,  happy  in  communicating.  How  beautifully  does  this  saying  reveal  the 
whole  heart  of  Clnist,  whose  whole  aim  was  to  impart  to  others  from  the  fulness  of  his 
heavenly  riches ! 


THE  DEMONIAC  HEALED.  239 

The  centurion  heard  that  Christ,  in  compliance  with  the  request  of 
the  elders,  was  approaching  his  house.  But  then  the  thought  arose, 
"  Hast  thou  not  gone  too  far  in  asking  the  Son  of  Goi),  who  has  spirits 
at  his  command,  to  come  to  thy  house?  Hast  thou  not  lowered  him, 
by  presuming  that  his  corporeal  presence  is  necessary  to  the  healing 
of  thy  slave  ]  Could  he  not  have  employed  one  of  his  hosts  of  minister- 
ing spirits  to  accomplish  it  1"  ["  Saij  in  a  word,  and  my  servant  shall 
he  healed.  For  I,  also  . . .  say  unto  one,  '  Come,'  and  lie  cometh  ;  and  to 
another,  'Go,'  and  he  goeth."*\  Although  his  hesitation,  doubtless, 
arose  in  part  from  his  unwillingness,  as  a  heathen,  to  summon  the 
Saviour  to  his  house,  his  words  imply  that  it  arose  far  more  from  his 
conscious  un worthiness  in  comparison  with  Christ's  greatness.  He 
conceived  Christ  to  be  the  Son  of  God  in  a  sense  natural  to  one  who 
had,  from  paganism,  become  a  believer  in  Theism. 

The  centurion  illustrates  a  state  of  heart  which,  in  all  ages  of  Chris- 
tianity, belongs  to  those  who  are  susceptible  of  admitting  and  em- 
bracing Christ:  the  consciousness,  namely,  of  His  loftiness  and  our 
own  unworthiness.  Here  was  the  deep  import  of  his  signs  of  faith  ; 
and  here  the  g-round  of  these  strikinfj  words  of  Christ  addressed  lo 
the  attendant  multitudes:  '•'I  have  not  found  so  great  faith,  no,  not  in 
Israel."  He  had,  indeed,  found  access  to  the  people  ;  he  had,  indeed, 
f(jund  faith,  but  not  such  faith  as  that  of  this  pagan.  The  faith  of  the 
Jews,  prejudiced  by  their  peculiar  notions  of  the  Messiahship,  could 
not,  as  yet,  raise  itself  to  a  just  intuition  of  the  super-human  greatness 
of  Christ.  But  the  pagan,  viewing  Christ  as  Lord  of  the  World  of 
Spirits,  had  reached  a  p(jint  which  the  Apostles  themselves  were  only 
to  attain  at  a  later  period.  And  here  we  have  a  sign  that  the  true  and 
high  intuition  of  the  person  of  Christ  v/as  to  come  rather  from  thf 
stand-point  of  paganism  than  of  Judaism. 

§  16 L  Healing  of  the  Deaf  and  Dumb  Demoniac. —  The  Charge  of  a 

League  with  Beelzebub:    a  Visible  Sign  demanded. — rThe  Charge 

refuted. 

The  constantly  increasing  influence  of  Christ  naturally  heightened 

frround  to  suspect  it  as  au  inveutioii  ?  As  for  Matthew's  statement,  that  the  centurion 
himself  applied  to  Christ,  it  may  naturally  and  easily  be  explained  on  the  supjiosition  of  nn 
abbreviation  of  the  narrative,  or  obliteratiou  of  individual  features  of  the  occuiTcnce. 

*  We  cannot  admit  Dr.  Strauss' s  assertion  that  the  prayer  sent  by  the  elders  (Luke, 
vii.,  3)  is  inconsistent  with  the  second  messai^e  (v.  (i),  and  that,  therefore,  the  connexion 
which  m  Matthew  is  natural  is  umiatural  in  Luke.  Had  Luke's  account  been  a.  frtioa, 
instead  of  makinij  the  centurion  take  back  his  prayer  sent  by  the  elders,  it  would  have 
iriven  the  prayer  a  different  character  from  the  beginning:.  Considering  it  as  a  narrative 
(S fact,  it  bears  ytrecisely  the  stamp  of  real  life:  the  centurion,  at  first,  absorbed  in  his 
anxiety,  sends  for  Christ  to  come  to  him:  afterward,  when  he  finds  the  fulfilment  of  his 
desire  at  hand,  the  sense  of  his  unworthiness  in  comparison  with  the  greatness  of  Christ 
becomes  prominent,  and  with  it  a  sense  of  the  impropriety  of  his  request. 


240  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

the  wrath  of  the  Pharisees.  A  movemfjnt  which  they  coulrl  not  check 
was  in  progress  against  the  spirit  and  the  interests  of"  their  paity.  But 
a  powerful  impression,  wrought  by  a  single  miracle,  gave  the  signal  for 
a  new  and  more  artful  attack.  This  occasion  was  the  healing  a  man 
of  imbecile  mind,  or  a  melancholy  idiot,  who  went  about  appearing 
neither  to  see  nor  to  hear  any  thing  that  passed  around  him.*  The 
people  received  the  cure  as  a  sign  of  Christ's  Messianic  power. 

It  was  necessary  for  the  Pharisees  to  remove  this  impression  fi'om 
their  minds.  But  how  was  it  to  be  done  1  The  Jact  could  neither  be 
denied  nor  attributed  to  natural  agencies.  In  this  dilemma  they  had 
recourse  to  falsehood,  and  accused  him  of  employing  an  evil  magic,  a 
belief  in  which  still  propagated  itself  among  the  traditionst  of  Jewish 
fanaticism.  The  Prince  of  Evil  Spirits,  they  said,  in  order  to  secure 
favour  among  the  people  for  the  false  prophet  who  was  labouring  for 
Satan's  kingdom,  had  given  him  power  to  exorcise  inferior  spirits  from 
men  ;  thus  sacrificing  a  less  object  for  a  greater.^ 

Others,  again,  whose  hostility  to  Christ  and  to  truth  was  not  so  decided 
(although  they  were  not  susceptible  of  Divine  impressions),  only  refused 
to  acknowledge  the  miracle  as  a  sufficient  sign  of  Messiahship,  and 
demanded  an  immediate  token  from  God — a  voice  from  heaven,  or  a 
celestial  appearance. § 

Christ  first  replied  to  the  most  decided  opponents,  and,  to  show  the 
absurdity  of  their  accusation,  reasoned  as  follows  :  "  It  is  a  contradic- 
tion in  terms  to  suppose  that  good  can  be  directly  wrought  by  evil;! 

*  Luke,  xi.,  14  ;  Matt.,  xii.,  22.  Tliis  view  of  the  case  is  founded  upon  the  fact  that  tl:e 
man's  dumbness  is  ascribed  (which  is  not  done  in  other  cases)  to  his  being  possessed 
with  demons,  and  his  subsequent  ability  to  hear  and  speak  to  their  expulsion.  Matthew 
adds  blindness,  which  harmonizes  well  with  our  view.  We  infer  from  the  impression 
produced  by  the  miracle  that  the  case  differed  from  ordinary  possessions.  It  is  possible, 
however,  that  the  case  is  confounded  in  Matthew  with  other  cures  of  blind  men ;  cf  Matt.. 
ix.,  27-34.  This  last  passage,  v.  32-34,  seems  to  be  but  an  abridged  account  of  the  very 
case  under  discussion.  t  Ce.hvs  took  a  hint  from  these.  t  Matt.,  xii.,  24-26. 

§  How  strongly  expectations  of  this  kind  were  cherished  by  the  Jews  is  shown  by  the 
fact  that  Philo's  HellenicAlexaudriau  culture  could  not  free  him  from  them,  although  the 
expectation  of  a  personal  Messiah  is  not  prominent  in  him.  He  believes  that,  when  the 
purification  of  the  scattered  Jews  is  accomplished,  they  will  be  drawn  together  from  all 
nations,  by  a  celestial  phenomenon,  to  one  definite  place  :  '•  Itvayovntvoi  vpo^  tivo;  &ctorip^ts 
5  Karu  (pvntv  utOpuiTriirjii  S^cuiS,  uh'/Xov  fi(v  tripois,  pdvoii  6i  Toli  ava(jio\o^i.ivois  ifUpavot,:" — J>e 
Exea-nt.,  ^  9. 

II  There  is,  indeed,  a  sense  in  which  the  kingdom  of  evil  is  always  at  war  witii  itself; 
but  in  evil,  as  such,  as  opposed  to  good,  there  is  always  a  definite  relative  unity.  If  this 
unity  was  destroyed,  if  Satan  were  to  accomplish  the  same  good  as  that  wrought  by  tlie 
power  of  God,  it  would  be  a  contradictio  in  adjecto  ;  the  kingdom  of  evil  would  be  ipsn 
facio  subverted.  Evil  may.  and  indeed  must,  iiidiredly  subserve  good  ;  but  it  cannot  </.'- 
redly  do  good  so  long  as  its  nature,  as  evil,  remains.  A  kingdom,  or  a  family,  may  con- 
tinue to  exist  as  such,  with  an  internal  discord  in  its  bosom  that  is  the  germ  of  its  dissolu- 
tion ;  but  the  relatire  unity  must  remain.  This  truth  admitted  the  further  application — 
which  Christ  did  not  express,  but  left  to  the  Pharisees  to  make — that  ;;atan  could  not  seek 


THE  LEPER  HEALED.  237 

one  who  honours  Jesus  as  Messiah  and  Theocratic  King,  antl  makes  a 
zealous  confession  thereof,  is  thereby  fitted  to  share  in  the  kingd(;m  ; 
the  heart  must  be  shown  to  accord  with  the  confession,  by  a  faithful 
performance  of  the  will  of  God*  ["  Not  every  one  that  saith  tinto  mc, 
Lord,  Lord,  shall  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven  ;  hut  he  that  dnelh 
the  will  of  my  Father  which  is  in  heaven."] 

VI.    True    and   False   Disciples    Contrasted. 
§  158.   Test  of  Discipleship.     (Matt.,  vii.,  24-27.) 

Christ  concludes  the  whole  discourse  with  a  contrast  between  true 
and  false  disciples  ;  between  those  who  take  care  to  apply  to  their  life 
and  practice  the  truths  which  he  had  laid  down,  and  those  who  do  not. 
He  thus  makes  prominent,  in  the  conclusion,  the  great  truth  announced 
in  the  beginning,  and  carried  through  the  discourse,  viz.,  that  a  right 
disposition  of  heart  is  essential  in  all  things.  According  to  their  riglit 
application  of  his  words  his  hearers  were  to  judge  themselves,  and  find 
their  destiny  described  (v.  24-27).  ["  Therefore,  whosoever  hcareth 
these  sayings  of  mine,  and  doeth  them,  I  icill  liken  him  unto  a  tcise  man, 
which  htiilt  his  house  upon  a  rock  :  and  the  rain  descended,  and  the 
floods  came,  and  the  winds  blew,  and  beat  upon  that  hoxise,  and  it  fell 
not ;  for  it  was  founded  upon  a  rock.  And  every  one  that  heareth  these 
sayings  of  mine,  and  doeth  them  not,  shall  he  likened  unto  a  foolish  man, 
which  huilt  his  house  upon  the  sand  :  and  the  rain  descended,  and  the 
floods  came,  and  the  7vi?ids  hlew,  and  heat  upon  that  house,  and  it  fell ; 
and  great  was  the  fall  of  zV."] 

These  words  of  wai-ning,  at  the  end  of  the  discourse,  harmonize 
well  w^th  its  beginning. 

END    OF    THE    SERMON    ON    THE    MOUNT. 

§  159.  Healing  of  the  Leper  on  the  Road  to  Capernauni.\ 
After  Christ  had  concluded  his  deeply  impi'essive  discourse,  he  dis- 
missed the  multitude  and  came  down  from  the  mountain  with  his  disci 
pies.  Hosts  of  people  attended  him  to  Capernaum.  A  leper,  who 
had  probably  heard  of  his  miracles,  and  learnpd  that  he  would  pass 
that  way,  had  planted  himself  by  the  road-side.  Full  of  faith,  he 
threw  himself  at  the  Saviour's  feet  and  said,  "  Lord,  if  thou  wilt,  thou 
canst  make  me  clean"  After  Christ  had  granted  his  petition,  he  bade 
him  (as  was  his  wont  in  such  cases)  first  to  do  what  the  law — which 
He  had  come  to  "destroy"  only  by  "fulfilling" — demanded,|  viz.,  to 

*  Ch.  vii.,  24,  connects  closely  with  v.  21.  On  the  relation  of  v.  23,  23,  to  the  rest  of  the 
passage,  we  shall  speak  hereafter. 

t  Matt.,  viii.,  1.  I  follow  Matthew's  account,  which  suits  the  chronology,  in  preference 
to  Luke's  (v.  12),  which  says  nothing  about  the  locality  of  the  event.  It  was  not  custom- 
ary, under  the  Mosaic  law,  for  lepers  to  reside  within  the  cities.  Cf  Joseph.,  c.  Apion,  i., 
xxxi. ;  Arcbo3ol.,  iii.,  U,  $  3.  %  Levit.,  xiv,,  1. 


2.38  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

show  himself  to  the  pi'iests  and  offer  the  prescribed  sacrifice,  in  ordm 
to  readmission  into  the  Theocratic  community,  from  which  he  had 
been  excluded  as  unclean. 

§  160.  Htal'mg  of  the  Heathen  Centurion's  Slave  at  Capernaum* — The 
Deputation  of  Elders. — Faith  of  the  .Centurion. 

As  -soon  as  Christ  an-ived  at  Capernaum,  his  aid  was  sought  in  be- 
half of  another  sufferer.  The  elders  of  the  synagogue  came  to  him 
with  a  petition  in  the  name  of  a  centurion.  He  was  a  heathen  ;  but, 
like  many  other  heathens  of  that  age,  unsatisfied  with  the  old  and 
languishing  popular  religion,  and  impressed,  by  the  moral  and  religious 
spiint  of  the  Jewish  Theism,  he  has  been  led  to  believe  in  Jehovah 
as  the  Almighty.  Whether  a  j)'>'osclyte  of  the  gate\  or  not,  he  had 
proved  his  faith  by  building  a  Jewish  synagogue  at  his  own  expense. 

His  love  and  care  for  a  faithful  slave|  shows  how  his  piety  had  in- 
fluenced his  character.  During  Christ's  absence  this  slave  became 
severely  ill ;  and  just  when  he  was  ready  to  die,  the  centurion  heard, 
to  his  great  joy,  of  the  Saviour's  return.  Placing  his  only  hopes  in 
Him,  he  hastened  to  ask  his  assistance.  But  he  had  been  accustomed 
to  look  upon  the  Jews  alone  as  consecrated  to  the  worship  of  the  Most 
High  ;  and  Christ  yet  appeared  to  belong  only  to  that  people.  He  did 
not  venture,  therefore,  as  a  heathen,  to  apply  to  him  directly,  but 
sought  the  mediation  of  the  elders,  ^^•hom  he  had  laid  under  obligation.§ 

*  Matt.,  viii.,  5  ;  Luke,  vii.,  2.  Tlie  chronological  ogjeement  of  the  accounts,  derived  from 
Boparate  sources,  is  proof  of  their  veracity.     W'e  follow  Luke's,  as  the  more  original. 

t  The  relation  iu  which  he  appears  to  stand  to  Judaism  and  the  Jews  would  make  it 
probable  that  he  vas  a  proselyte  of  the  gate.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  if  he  had  been,  the 
Jewish  elders  would  probably  have  mentioned  it  in  their  recommendation  of  him ;  he 
would  have  had  the  usual  designation,  ci.li6ixs.vos,  (poCovfievos  rbv  Beoi/. 

t  The  word  used  iu  Matthew  is  rizij,  1^'J  ',  which  may,  indeed,  mean  slave,  but  seems 
to  be  intended  by  him  for  "  son,"  as  he  uses  the  article  throughout  the  nairative  (o  miis). 
'lliis,  however,  may  be  explained  on  the  ground  that  either  the  centurion  had  but  o/w  slave. 
or  that  he  valued  this  one  particularly.  If  "son"  were  intended,  it  might  be  accounted  for 
from  the  ambiguity  of  the  word  both  in  Hebrew  and  Greek ;  the  high  degi-ee  of  love 
which  the  centurion  displayed,  also,  was  more  likely  to  be  felt  for  a  son  than  a  slave,  aiui 
this  may  have  led  to  the  use  of  the  word. 

^  Luke's  account,  on  its  face,  shows  that  it  was  taken  from  life;  but  Strauss  (with  whom 
De  Wetle  agrees)  tliinks  it  bears  the  marks  of  a  later  hand,  working  over  Matthew's  purer 
and  more  original  statement.  According  to  Straus.':,  the  humility  with  which  the  centurion 
himself  addressed  Christ  (Matt.,  viii.,  8)  gave  rise  to  the  conclusion  that  a  heathen  wlio  had 
liad  so  low  an  opinion  of  himself  could  not  possibly  have  applied  to  Christ  except  through 
Jewish  mediation ;  and  then  it  was  necessai-y  to  invent  such  an  embassy,  iu  order  to  assig.'i 
a  proper  motive  for  Christ's  immediate  compliance  with  the  request  of  the  heathen.  Grant, 
for  a  moment,  that  it  were  in  itself  reasonable  and  iu  hannony  with  the  simplicity  of  oit 
Evangelists;  still,  we  should  expect  su.;h  an  intei-jwlation  rather  iu  Matthew,  whose  narra- 
tive is  supposed  to  be  derived  from  a  Palestine  Jcwish-Cliristian  tradition,  than  in  Luke. 
who  belonged  more  to  the  type  of  Paul.  True,  the  conduct  of  the  centurion,  as  stated  by 
Luke,  is  precisely  suited  to  bis  character,  as  shown  in  his  words  recorded  by  Matthew ;  to 
his  mode  of  thought  in  regard  to  the  person  of  Christ  and  the  relation  between  Jews  and 
heathen.    But  must  the  very  naturalness  and  probability  of  the  statement  itself  be  made  u 


THE  JEWISH  EXORCISTS.  241 

that  evil  should  be  conquered  by  evil;  that  one  should  be  iveedfrom 
the  pow^er  of  the  Evil  One  Z»y  the  povi^er  of  the  Evil  One.  Could  evil 
thus  do  the  works  of  good,  it  would  be  no  more  evil,"  He  then  ap- 
plies an  argumentum  ad  liomincm  to  the  Pharisees  [If  I  by  Beelzebub 
cast  out  devils,  by  whom  do  your  sons  cast  them  out  ?  therefore  shall  they 
be  your  judges^  If  a  charge  of  the  sort,  he  tells  them,  were  brought 
against  their  exorcists,  they  would  soon  pronounce  it  untenable.  It 
follows,  then,  that  this  Divine  act — the  delivery  of  a  human  soul  from 
the  evil  spirit  that  had  crushed  its  self-conscious  activity — was  wrought 
by  the  power  and  Spirit  of  God  alone. 

"  But/^  he  continues,  "  if  I  cast  out  devils  by  the  Sjririt  of  God,  then 
the  kingdo?n  of  God  is  come  unto  you.""  This  single  victory  proves  that 
a  power  has  come  among  men- which  is  able  to  conquer  evil — the  pow- 
er, namely,  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  which  ever  propagates  itself  in 
struggling  with  evil  ;  the  negative  presupposes  the  positive.  The  si- 
militude that  follows  illustrates  the  same  truth  :  "  When  a  strong  man^ 
armed,  kcepcth  his  jxilace,  his  goods  are  in  peace  ;  but  when  a  stronger 
than  he  shall  come  upon  him,  and  overcome  him,  he  taketh  from  him  all 
his  armour  wherein  he  trusted,  and  divideth  his  sjjoils."  So,  had  not  the 
power  of  evil  itself  been  subdued  by  a  higher  power,  such  individual 
manifestations  of  it  as  the  evil  spirit  in  the  demoniac  could  not  have 
been  conquered.* 

§  162.  The  Co7ijurations  of  the  Jewish  Exorcists.  (Luke,  xi.,  23-2'6.) 
It  followed,  from  the  foregoing  words  of  Christ  in  reply  to  the  Phar- 
isees, that  all  cures  of  demoniacs  wrought  on  any  other  principles  must 
be  entirely  appai'ent  and  deceptive. t  It  was  of  no  avail  to  remove  in- 
dividual symptoms  while  the  cause,  viz.,  the  dominion  of  the  evil  prin- 
ciple, remained  unshaken.  The  very  agency  that  removed  the  former 
for  a  time  would  only  strengthen  the  latter,  to  break  forth  again  witli 
increased  power. 

Therefore,  although  Christ,  speaking  Kar^  avOpomov,  presupposed 
that  the  Jewish  exorcists  could  heal  demoniacs,  he  could  not  recognize 
their  cures  as  genuine.  So  he  says  (Luke,  xi.,  23),  "  Whosoever  is  not 
with  me  (works  not  in  communion  with  me  in  the  power  of  the  Holy 
Ghost)  is  against  me  (opposes  in  his  works  the  kingdom  of  God); 
and  he  that  gathereth  not  with  me  (does  not,  in  communion  with  me, 

to  secure  access  to  the  hearts  of  men  for  one  whose  whole  nature  and  labours  were  op- 
posed to  the  kingdom  of  evil.  "  Satan,  casting  out  Satan,"  would  be  no  more  Satan.  The 
difficulties,  therefore,  which  De  Wette  finds  in  the  passage  are  overcome.  The  truth  of 
Christ's  proposition  docs  not  lie  upon  the  surface. 

*  Christ  here  indicates  that  the  so-called  demoniacal  possessions  were  nothing  else  but 
individual  phenomena  of  Satan's  kingdom  manifested  amoag  men. 

t  As  a  physician,  who  treats  the  symptoms  of  disease,  but  neglects  the  cause,  strength- 
ens the  latter  by  the  very  medicines  which  palliate  the  former.  A  vivid  illustration  of  the 
pregnant  truth  here  unfolded  by  Christ  in  reference  to  the  cures  of  the  demoniacs. 


242  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

gather  souls  for  the  kingdom)  scattcrcth  abroad*  (leads  them  astray,  and 
thus  really  works  for  the  kingdom  of  Satan,  against  which  he  apparent- 
ly contends)."  The  exorcists  pretended,  in  casting  out  devils,  to  fight 
against  Satan  ;  but  in  fact,  by  their  arts  of  deceit,  were  striving  against 
the  kingdom  of  God.  How  cutting  a  contrast  to  the  assertion  of  the 
Pharisees  that  devils  might  be  cast  out  by  the  aid  of  Satan  ! 

The  same  truth  is  illustrated  in  parabolic  form  in  verses  24-26  ;  un- 
less a  radical  cure  of  the  demoniac  is  made  by  the  redeeming  power 
of  the  Divine  Spirit,  his  soul  remains  estranged  from  God,  the  appa- 
rently cured  disease  seizes  it  with  new  force,  the  ungodly  spirit  finds 
his  old  haunt — his  former  dwelling  is  completely  prepared  for  his  re- 
ception.f 

*  This  text  is  put  in  the  same  connexion  in  Matt,  (xii.,  30).  But  the  ha  touto  of  v.  31 
does  not  naturally  join  with  v.  30;  there  is  no  such  causal  relation  as  is  implied  by  the 
phrase,  nor  does  it  join  any  more  closely  with  what  follows ;  indeed,  it  appears  rather  to 
belong  at  tlie  end  of  all  the  proofs  adduced  against  the  Pharisees.  The  right  arrangement 
is  doubtless  that  of  Luke  (xii.,  23-26) ;  and  the  more  profound  order  of  the  thought,  as 
Luke  presents  it,  is  not  the  work  of  chance,  but  a  proof  of  the  originality  of  the  account. 
I  must  differ,  therefore,  from  Professor  Elwert,  who,  in  his  ingenious  dissertation  (Stud, 
dcr  Geistl.  Wurtcm.,  ix-,  1.,  1836),  denies  that  Luke,  xi..  23,  has  reference  to  the  verses  im- 
mediately preceding.  Understanding  the  parable  more  in  the  sense  of  Matthew  (although 
he  admits  Luke's  originality  also),  he  connects  this  passage  with  it,  and  considers  it  as  direct- 
ed against  the  indecision  of  the  multitude,  who,  after  moments  of  enthusiastic  excitement 
in  Christ's  favour,  suffered  themselves  to  be  so  easily  led  astray.  But  we  ought  not  to 
seek  new  combinations  when  the  original  connexion  of  a  passage,  lying  before  us,  offers  a 
good  sense.  Even  apart  from  this,  however.  Prof.  E.'s  explanation  does  not  suit  the  latter 
clause  of  V.  23  at  all — "  He  that  gathereth  not  with  me,  scattereth" — which  is  obviously 
not  directed  against  an  inward  disposition,  but  outward  acts ;  viz.,  acts  which  pretend  to 
be  done  in  favour  of  Christ's  kingdom,  but  in  reality  operate  against  it.  Prof  E.  himself 
admits  (p.  180)  that  the  words  quoted,  if  taken  strictly  in  their  connexion,  do  not  favour  his 
view;  but  thinks  he  is  justified,  by  their  approaching  to  the  character  of  a  jyroverh,  in  de- 
parting from  the  sti-ict  construction.  There  is  no  proof,  however,  that  Christ  made  use 
here  of  an  existing  proverb  ;  but  this  is  immaterial  to  the  interpretation  of  the  passage. 
On  the  whole,  my  view  corresponds  with  that  of  Schleiei-macher,  in  loc.  The  relatien  of 
Luke,  xi.,  23,  to  ix.,  50,  will  be  examined  in  its  place  hereafter. 

t  Luke,  xi.,  24-25.  In  Matt.,  xii.,  43-45,  the  passage  is  introduced  in  a  different  con- 
nexion, and  must  be  differently  interpreted  ;  it  was  applied  to  illusti'ate  the  truth,  viz., 
that  that  generation,  refusing  to  obey  the  call  to  repentance,  should  therefore  fall  into  worse 
and  more  incurable  corruption.  This  corresponds  perfectly  to  the  sense  of  the  parable ; 
and  the  thought  which  it  contains  finds  a  rich  and  manifold  illustration  in  history,  both  on  a 
large  and  small  scale  ;  in  all  those  cases,  namely,  in  which  a  temporary  and  apparent  ref- 
ormation, without  a  radical  cure  of  fundamental  evil,  has  been  follovred  by  a  sti'onger  re- 
action. This  application  of  the  passage  implies  that  signs  of  an  apparent  amendment  had 
shown  themselves  in  "  that  generation ;"  and,  moreover,  it  rerjuires  that  the  passage  itself 
should  be  refeiTed  to  the  impressions,  great,  but  not  permanent,  which  Christ's  works,  no^v 
and  again,  produced  upon  the  multitude.  But  it  is  clear  that  the  nearer  and  stricter  ap- 
plication of  the  passage  is  that  given  in  Luke,  viz.,  to  the  apjjarent  healing  of  the  demo- 
niacs. One  thing  is  evident  from  Matthew's  use  of  it,  viz.,  that  it  was  well  understood 
from  the  beginning  tliat  the  passage  was  not  to  be  taken  literally,  but  figuratively,  wliicli 
indeed,  is  obvious  enough  from  the  whole  form  of  discourse.  It  would  have  been  contrary 
to  all  analogy  for  the  men  of  that  time,  disposed  as  they  were  to  take  evory  thing  in  a 
literal  sense,  to  attach  a  spiritual  meaning  to  these  words,  if  it  had  not  been  obvious  tliat 
he  spoke  them  entirely  by  way  of  parable.     This  is  written— quite  superfluously — solely 


BLASPHEMY  AGAINST  THE  HOLY  GHOST.  243 

§  163.  Blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Ghost  and  against  the  Son  of 
Man.     (Matt.,  xii.,  32.) 

Christ,  having  thus  shown  to  the  Pharisees  the  emptiness  of  their 
charge,  and  the  absurdity  of  the  assumption  which  formed  its  basis, 
then  assumed  the  offensive,  and  pointed  out  to  them  the  ground  of  their 
coming  to  utter  such  a  self-refuting  accusation.  It  was  because  the 
disposition  of  their  hearts  ruled  and  swayed  their  decision  ;  what  aggra- 
vated their  guilt  was,  that  they  suppressed  the  consciousness  of  God 
and  of  truth,  to  whose  strivings  in  their  minds  their  very  accusation 
bore  testimony.  "  Because  you  cannot  really  believe  that  I  work  with 
the  power  of  the  Spirit  of  Evil,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  could  readily 
have  satisfied  yourselves  that  I  could  do  such  works  only  by  the  power 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  therefore,  I  say  unto  you,  it  is  one  thing  with  those 
who  stumble  at  the  human  form  of  my  manifestation,  and  are  unable  to 
recognize  the  Son  of  God  in  the  veil  of  flesh,  with  those  who,  through 
prejudice  or  ignorance,  blaspheme  the  Son  of  Man  because  he  does  not 
appear,  as  they  expected  the  Messiah  would,  in  earthly  splendour;* 
and  quite  another  thing  with  you,  who  will  not  receive  the  revelation 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  that  comes  towards  you,  who  suppress  the  conscious 
truth  within  you,  declaring  that  to  be  the  Evil  Spirit's  work  which  you 
feel  yourselves  impelled  to  recognize  as  the  work  of  the  Holy  Ghost" 
(v.  31-33). 

Where  the  root  in  the  heart  is  not  corrupted,  where  the  sense  of 
truth  is  not  stifled — as  in  the  case  of  those  who  blaspheme  the  Son  of 
Man  not  known  as  such — there  Christ  finds  a  starting-point  for  repent- 
ance, and  access  for  forgiveness.  But  where  the  Spirit  of  Lies  has 
taken  full  possession,  says  he,  there  can  be  no  room  for  repent- 
ance, and,  consequently,  no  forgiveness.  It  is  not  clear,  however, 
whether  he  meant  to  charge  upon  the  very  individuals  in  question  this 
total  suppression  of  truth  and  submission  to  the  Spirit  of  Lies,  thus 
utterly  excluding  them  from  repentance  and  pardon  ;  or  whether,  by 
drawing  this  distinct  line  of  demarcation,  he  wished  to  show  them  how 
precarious  a  footing  they  held,  far  from  the  first  class,  and  near  tt)  the 
second.     In  fact,  the  Spirit  of  Lies,  which  permits  no  impressions  of 

ai,'ainst  Strauss  ;  for  the  sense  in  wliich  Clirist  used  the  parable  is  plaiiity  obvious  IVom 
the  connexion. 

*  There  were  some  such  among  the  Jews,  led  away  by  prejudice  and  ignorance,  rather 
than  by  evil  dispositions,  to  blaspheme  what  they  did  not  understand.  These  were  not 
beyond  the  reach  of  Divine  impressions  and  convictions,  if  presented  at  more  favourable 
periods.  Many  who  then  stumbled  at  the  Sou  of  Man  in  the  form  of  a  servant  were 
afterward  more  readily  led  to  beheve  by  the  operations  of  the  Spirit  proceeding  from  the 
glorified  Son  of  Man.  But  what  clearness  and  freedom  of  mmd,  what  elevation  above  all 
personal  influences,  did  Christ  display  in  thus  distinguishing,  in  the  very  heat  of  the  battle, 
the  different  classes  of  his  enemies  !  The  distinction  thus  drawn  by  Christ  is  applicable  to 
the  different  opponents  of  Christianity  in  all  ages. 


214  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

the  Good  and  the  True,  held  a  high  degree  of  dominion  over  these 
Pharisees. 

Christ  further  told  the  Pharisees  (in  close  connexion  with  his  ex 
posure  of  their  evil  disposition  of  heart)  that,  in  their  moral  condition, 
they  could  not  speak  otherwise  than  they  had  done  :  "  O  generation  of 
vipers  !  hoio  can  ye,  hcing  evil,  speak  good  thifigs  V  Their  decision 
upon  his  act  bore  the  impress  of  their  ungodly  nature.  '•'For  out  of 
the  abundance  of  the  heart  the  mouth  spcaketh  ;''''  and  therefore  it  is — 
because  the  evil  nature  can  express  itself  outw^ardly  in  words  as  well 
as  deeds — that  Chiist  attaches  so  much  import  to  their  words.  The 
judgment  of  God,  which  looks  only  at  the  heart,  will  visit  words  no 
less  than  works :  "  /  say  unto  you,  that  every  idle  word  that  men  shall 
speali,  they  shall  give  account  thereof  in  the  day  of  judgment ;  for  by 
thy  words  thou  shalt  be  justified,  and  by  thy  words  shall  thou  be  con- 
demnedr* 

§  164.  Purpose  of  Christ'' s  Relatives  to  confine  him  as  a  Lunatic. — He 
declares  who  are  his  Relatives  in  the  Spiritual  Scfise.j 
While  Christ  was  thus  exposing  the  machinations  of  the  Pharisees 
and  the  evil  spirit  that  insjaired  them,  he  was  informed  that  his  mother 
and  his  brothers,  who  could  not  appi'oach  on  account  of  the  throng, 
were  seeking  him.|  As  the  scene  that  was  going  on  threatened  bad 
results  to  the  Phaiisaic  party  by  making  a  strong  impression  upon  the 
people,  the  Pharisees  had  sought  to  break  it  up,  by  persuading  his 
relatives  that  he  had  lost  his  senses.§  His  severe  discourses,  doubtless, 
appeared  to  many  a  bigoted  scribe  as  the  words  of  a  madman  (John, 
X.,  20),  and  the  Pharisees  probably  made  use  of  them  in  imposing  upon 
his  relatives.  The  apparent  contrarieties  in  Christ's  discourses  and 
actions  could  only  be  harmonized  by  a  complete  and  true  intuition  of 

*  This  announcement  was  directly  opposed  to  the  Pharisees'  doctrine,  according  to  which 
morality  was  judged  by  the  standard  of  quantity. 

t  Matt.,  xii.,  46-50;  Mark,  iii.,  31,  seq. ;  Luke,  viii.,  19,  seq. 

X  By  li'>>  (in  Matthew  and  Mark)  we  are,  perhaps,  to  understand  "  autfide  of  the  throng,'' 
or,  outside  of  an  enclosure.  It  is  not  necessary  (nor,  indeed,  suitable)  to  assume  that  the 
assembly  was  gathered  in  a  house. 

§  Mark,  iii.,  21.  Tliis  does  not  look  [as  some  would  have  it]  like  a  wilful  colouring,  added 
to  the  facts  by  tradition,  or  by  Mark  himself;  but  rather  indicates,  as  do  slight  characteristic 
touches  in  other  passages  given  bj'  Mark  alone,  that  this  Evangelist  made  use  of  authorities 
peculiarly  his  own.  Such  an  invention,  or  perversion  of  tradition,  would  have  been  utterlj' 
inconsistent  with  the  tone  of  thought  and  feeling  generally  prevalent  in  regard  to  Christ : 
who,  in  those  days,  would  have  believed  that  Christ's  own  brothers  could  listen  to  such  a 
blasphemy  again.st  him !  It  has  been  supposed,  again,  that  the  statement  in  Maj-k  origi- 
nated in  a  misinidcrstanding  of  the  accusation  brought  against  Ciu-ist  by  the  Pharisees  ;  but 
this  is  impossible ;  who  roald  suppose  the  accusation  to  mean  that  "  he  cast  out  devils, 
being  himself  a  demoniac  ?"  Ou  the  other  hand,  different  members  of  the  Piinrisaic  party, 
or  the  same  persons  with  dittbrent  objects  in  view,  might  have  originated  both  slanders ; 
at  one  moment  charging  him  with  the  Satanic  league,  and  at  another  with  being  a  de 
moniac  himsell 


SIGN  OF  THE  PROPHET  JONAH.  245 

his  personality;  to  his  brothers  he  was  always  an  enigma  and  a  para- 
dox, and  they  could,  therefore,  the  more  easily,  in  an  unhappy  moment, 
be  perplexed  by  the  crafty  Pharisees.*  It  is  difficult,  however,  to 
imagine  that  Mary  could  have  been  thus  deceived  ;  she  may  have 
followed  them  from  anxiety  of  a  different  kind  about  her  son. 

But  Christ,  surrounded  by  a  host  of  anxious  seekers  for  salvation, 
Iieard  the  announcement  undisturbed.  To  show,  by  this  striking  case, 
that  blood  relationship  did  not  imply  affinity  for  his  Spii'it,  he  asked, 
"Who  is  my  mother,  and  who  are  my  hrolhcrsV  Pointing  to  the 
seeking  souls  around  him,  and  to  his  nearer  spiritual  kindred — the 
disciples — he  said,  "Behold  my  viother  and  my  hrothcrs  !  For  whoso- 
ever shall  do  the  loill  of  my  Father  which  is  in  heaven,  the  same  is  my 
brother,  and  sister,  and  mother.'"^ 

§  165.  The  Demand  of  a  Sign  from  Heaven  answered  only  by  the  Sign 
of  the  Prophet  Jonah.     (Luke,  xi.,  16,  29-36.) 

We  stated,  on  p.  240,  that  the  less  violent  of  Christ's  opponents 
demanded  of  him  "  a  sign  from  heaven."  In  answering  these,  he 
showed  that  their  ungodly  disposition  of  heart  was  at  once  the  ground 
of  their  unbelief  and  the  secret  motive  of  their  demand. 

\^An  evil  and  adulterous  generation  secheth  after  a  sign ;  and  there 
shall  710  sign  be  given  to  it,  but  the  sign  of  the  Prophet  Jonah.  For  as 
Jonah  was  a  sign  to  the  Ninevites,  so,  also,  shall  the  Son  of  Man  be  to 
this  generation.^  "In  vain  did  they  ask  a  new  sign  ;  such  a  one  as  they 
asked  they  should  not  obtain.  No  other  sign  should  they  have  but 
that  of  the  Prophet  Jonah,|  i.  e.,  the  whole  manifestation  of  Christ,§  by 

*  It  is  worthy  of  note  that  John  (vii.,  5-7)  mentions,  precisely  with  reference  to  this  same 
point  of  time,  that  Christ's  brothers  did  not  believe  in  his  Divine  calling,  but  wislied  to  put 
him  to  the  proof;  and  that  he  then  described  them  as  belonging  to  the  world. 

t  These  words  are  given  by  Luke  (viii.,  21)  in  a  different  connexion;  one  in  which,  in- 
deed, Christ  might  very  well  have  uttered  them,  although  the  occasion  for  them  docs  not 
appear  so  obvious  as  in  Matthew  and  Mark.  In  connexion  with  the  account  of  the  healing 
of  the  deaf  and  dumb  demoniac  given  by  Luke,  we  have  a  different  passage  (xi.,  27,  28) 
from  tlie  one  now  under  discussion,  but  which  yet  contains  something  of  a  similar  import, 
viz. :  a  conti'ast  between  a  mere  outward  love  of  Cliiist's  person  and  trae  reverence  for 
him.  This  affinity  of  meaning  may  have  caused  the  two  passages  to  change  places 
with  each  other.  "We  presupposed  this  in  our  use  of  Luke,  xi.,  28,  on  p.  189.  And  the 
affinity  of  tlie  two  expressions  may  have  also  caused  the  two  accounts  in  Matthew  and 
Mark  to  be  chronologically  connected  together.  +  See  above,  p.  136. 

§  In  Matt.,  xii.,  40,  the  reference  is  made  to  bear  upon  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  which 
is  quite  foreign  to  the  original  sense  and  connexion  of  the  passage.  It  was  Christ's  whole 
manifestation,  then  developing  itself  before  the  eyes  of  them  that  heard  him,  that  was  in 
question ;  the  resurrection  was  witnessed  only  by  persons  who  were  alrcadi/  believers,  for 
whom  it  was  a  sign  to  reanimate  their  faith.  For  those  who  persisted  in  unbelief,  notwith- 
$tanding  the  sign  of  his  whole  manifestation,  the  resurrection  was  a  sign  of  reproof,  a 
testimony  that  the  work  of  God  had  triumphed  over  all  their  machinations.  A  special 
application  of  the  type  in  this  way  would  have  drawn  tlie  attention  of  the  hearers  away 


24G  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

which  the  Jews  were  to  be  called  to  repent  and  escape  the  threatened 
judgment."  He  was  to  be  a  sign,  shining  for  all  mankind;  and  this 
candle,  once  lighted,  was  not  to  be  put  hi  a  secret  j'^ace,  neither  under  a 
bushel,  but  on  a  candlestick,  that  all  who  should  enter  the  house  might 
see  the  light  (v.  33).  So  was  He  to  be  a  light  unto  all  men.  But  in 
order  to  receive  the  light,  the  eye  must  be  sound.  And  what  the  eye 
is  to  the  body,  the  inner  light  of  Divine  consciousness,  originally  im- 
planted in  our  nature,  is  to  the  soul.  Where  this  light  has  become 
darkness ;  where  the  Divinity  in  man,  the  consciousness  of  God,  has 
been  subjugated  and  stifled  by  the  world,  all  that  is  within  is  full  of 
darkness,  and  no  light  from  without  can  illumine  it.  The  organ  where- 
with to  receive  Divine  revelations  is  wanting  (v.  34-36). 

Thus  it  was,  because  of  the  inner  darkness  of  their  souls,  that  these 
men  could  not  understand  "  the  sign"  given  by  Christ's  whole  manifes- 
tation ;  and  for  this  reason  it  was  that,  in  spite  of  all  the  signs  that  lay 
before  their  eyes,  they  ever  asked  for  more. 

§  166.  Discourse  j^ronoiinced  at  a  Feast  against  the  Hypocrisy  of  the 
Pharisees  and  the  Lawyers.     (Luke,  xi.,  37-52.) 

While  Christ  was  engaged  in  the  conversation  just  referred  to,  a  cer- 
tain Pharisee,  who  did  not  display  his  hostile  disposition  so  openly  as 
the  rest,  but  masked  it  under  the  garb  of  courtesy,  came  and  invited 
him  to  breakfast,  probably  with  a  view  to  catch  up  something  in  his 
words  or  actions  that  might  point  a  charge  of  heresy,  or  serve  to  cast 
suspicion  upon  him  at  a  subsequent  period. 

In  this  spirit,  he  found  it  quite  a  matter  of  offence  that  Christ  sat 
down  to  table  without  washing  his  hands.  The  Saviour  took  occasion 
from  this  to  expose  the  hypocrisy  of  the  sect;  and  availed  himself,  for 
the  purpose,  of  illustrations  drawn  from  the  objects  around  him  at  the 
feast.  "  You  Pharisees  make  the  cups  and  dishes  clean  outside,  but 
leave  them  full  of  dirt  within.  So  you  are  careful  to  preserve  an  out- 
ward show  of  purity,  but  inwardly  you  are  full  of  avarice  and  wicked- 
ness.*    Ye  fools,  are  not  the  inward  and  the  outward,  made  by  the 

from  the  maiu  point  of  comparison.  For  these  reasons,  we  think  the  verse  in  question  is  a 
commentary  by  a  later  hand. 

*  It  is  a  question  whether  Matt.,  xxiii.,  25,  or  Luke,  xi.,  39,  contains  the  original  fonn  of 
these  words.  In  the  latter,  the  second  member  of  the  illustration  is  wanting ;  Christ  passes 
over  from  the  illustration  (the  vessels)  to  the  thing  illustrated  (the  Pharisees).  The  two 
members  are  more  complete  in  Matthew:  "Ye  make  clean  the  outside  of  the  cups  and 
platters,  but  inwardly  Ihey  are  full  of  extortion  and  wickedness,"  i.  c,  their  contents  were 
obtained  by  avarice  and  oppression.  But  neither  is  this  precisely  apt,  nor  does  it  seem 
likely  that  Christ  would  have  reproached  the  Pharisee  exactly  in  this  form.  In  Luke  the 
laU  member  of  the  iUiislration  (the  cups  are  dirty  within)  and  thofrst  member  of  the  ap- 
plication (ye  are  careful  for  outward  purity)  are  wanting.  In  the  above  interpretation  of 
Matthew  we  follow  the  reading  adiKiai  ■  it  would  not  apply  if  we  take  that  of  the  lect.  re- 
cepl.,  viz.,  aKpaoias  ;  which  is  not  without  good  authority.     This  reading  recommends  itself 


THE  PHARISEES  REBUKED.  247 

same  Creator,  inseparable  1  From  within  must  true  morality  pro- 
ceed ;  from  the  heart  must  the  essence  of  piety  be  developed." 

From  this  he  takes  occasion  (v.  41-44)  to  expose  the  mock  piety  of 
the  Pharisees,  displayed  in  their  satisfying  themselves,  not  merely  in 
religion,  but  also  in  morality,  with  outward  and  empty  show.*  They 
manifested  their  hypocrisy  (v.  42)  in  giving  "  tithes"  of  the  most  trifling 
products  (mint,  cummin,  &c.),  and  entirely  neglecting  the  more  essen- 
tial duties  of  righteousness  and  love.  Their  vanity  and  haughtiness 
were  shown  (v.  43)  in  their  claiming  to  lord  it  over  every  body.  They 
were  (v.  44),  like  tombs,  so  beautifully  painted  that  no  one  would  sup- 
pose them  to  be  graves  ;  but  whose  fair  exterior  concealed  nothing  but 
putrefaction. 

At  this  point  a  laivyen  who  was  present  asked  Christ  whether  he 

as  the  more  difficult :  it  is  easy  to  conceive,  as  De  Wette  remarks,  bow  the  others  could 
have  grown  out  of  it. 

*  Luke,  xi.,  41,  presents  a  difBculty.  On  any  interpretation  it  seems  to  me  that  ra  hovrn 
corresponds  to  cawOtv,  as  contrasted  with  'diaiOev,  v.  39,  and  must  therefore  be  applied  to  the 
heart.  This  being  admitted,  the  only  question  is  whether  the  words  were  or  were  not 
spoken  ironically.  If  they  were  not,  it  must  seem  strange  that  Christ,  whose  design  was 
to  aim  at  the  disposition  of  the  heart,  should  have  laid  down  any  thing  so  easily  perverted 
into  opus  operatum.  It  may  be  said  that,  in  accordance  with  a  mode  of  teaching  which  he 
frequently  adopted,  viz.,  to  give  a  specific  instead  of  a  general  precept, — to  command  an 
outward  act,  as  a  sign  of  the  disposition,  instead  of  enjoining  the  disposition  itself;  he 
here  enjoins  alms-giving  as  proof,  in  act,  of  the  possession  of  that  love  which  imparts  to 
others.  This  appears  to  be  confirmed  by  the  verse  following,  in  which  justice  and  love  are 
mentioned  as  virtues  wholly  neglected  by  the  Pharisees  ;  implying  that  their  alms-giving, 
previously  mentioned,  being  destitute  of  the  proper  disposition,  was  valueless.  But,  ou 
the  other  hand,  where  Christ  employs  this  mode  of  teaching,  the  peculiar  kind  of  special 
injunction  that  he  gives  is  always  determined  by  the  character  of  his  hearers  ;  and  alms- 
giving would  have  been  an  inapt  injunction  to  Pharisees,  who,  as  we  learn  from  the  Ser- 
mon on  the  Mount,  made  great  show  and  display  thereof  Still,  the  injunction  may  have 
been  given  in  view  of  the  character  of  the  individual  Pharisees  before  him,  who  may  have 
been  known  as  avaricious  men;  and  Christ  may  have  known  that  to  part  with  their  money 
would  be  a  test  of  love  which  they  could  not  stand.  If  it  be  supposed  that  the  words  are 
not  accurately  reported,  and  that  the  special  injunction  is  due  to  the  writer,  and  not  to 
Christ,  still  the  connexion  sufficiently  guards  even  the  writer  from  the  charge  of  setting 
forth  the  opus  operatum. 

All  difficulties  would  disappear  if  we  could  assume  that  Christ  intended  only  to  point 
out  the  prevailing  spirit  in  which  the  Pharisees  acted,  and  the  sophisms  with  which  tliey 
satisfied  their  consciences.  "  As  to  your  inward  parts,  all  you  have  to  do  is  to  give  alms, 
and  lo  !  all  is  clean  for  you  !"  (You  think  that  alms-giving  is  to  cleanse  your  life  and  atone 
for  your  sins.)  Although  this  view  does  not  appear  perfectly  simple  and  natural,  I  cannot 
share  in  the  decisive  sentence  which  modem  writers,  and  even  De  Wette,  have  pronounced 
against  it.  It  may  be  connected  with  verse  42,  as  follows  :  "  You  cannot  with  this  mock 
piety  satisfy  the  law  of  God,  and  escape  his  judgments;  but  IVoe  unto  you  !"  He  then 
adds  another  illustration — their  "  tithing  of  mint,"  &c.,  as  corresponding  to  their  kind  of 
alms-giving ;  and  contrasts  both  forms  of  hypocrisy  (last  clause  of  v.  42)  with  the  true 
righteousness  and  love  of  which  they  were  destitute. 

t  There  appears  to  have  been  a  marked  distinction  between  these  voixiKoli  and  the  Phari- 
sees proper.  They  probably  applied  themselves  more  to  the  Scriptures  than  to  the  tra- 
ditions ;  not,  however,  wholly  rejecting  the  authority  of  the  latter.  (Perhaps  they  formed 
a  transition  sect  to  the  later  Karaites.)  This  might  account  for  their  expecting  Christ  to 
express  himself  more  favourably  of  them  than  of  the  Pharisees,  but  did  not  save  them 


248  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

meant  to  apply  these  censures  to  the  class  to  which  he  belonged,  also. 
From  this  the  Saviour  took  occasion,  in  the  remainder  of  the  discourse 
(v.  45-52),  to  expose  the  crimes  that  were  peculiar  to  the  lawyers. 

§  107.  Christ  Warns  his  Disciples  against  the  Pharisees. —  The  Power 
of  Divine  Truth.  (Luke,  xi.,  52 ;  xii.,  3.) 
It  is  probable  that  the  conversation,  commenced  at  the  breakfast-ta- 
ble, was  continued  in  the  open  air  ;*  the  irritated  Pharisees  interroga- 
ted him  anew,  seeking,  by  captious  questions,  to  find  some  handle  by 
which  to  gratify  their  malice  and  secure  the  vengeance  which  they  hoped 
to  wreak  upon  him,  A  multitude  of  other  persons  gathered ;  groups 
were  formed  around  Christ ;  and  the  Pharisees  finally  withdrew.  The 
Saviour  then  addressed  himself  to  the  immediate  circle  of  his  disciples, 
and  gave  them  warnings  and  cautions,  probably  occasioned  by  the  re- 
cent machinations  of  the  Pharisees.  "  Beware  of  the  leaven  of  the 
Pharisees,  tchich  is  hypocrisy  ;^^  a  leaven  which  impregnates  all  that 
comes  from  them,  and  poisons  all  who  come  in  contact  with  them. 
They  were  to  be  on  their  guard  ;  to  trust  no  appearances  ;  the  hostile 
aim  was  there,  even  when  carefully  concealed.  All  their  acts  alike 
were  poisoned  by  hypocrisy  ;  against  them  all  it  would  be  necessary 
to  watch.t 

from  bis  reproach.  They  coulj  derive  a  lifeless  anj  unspiritnal  system  from  the  letter  of 
the  Scriptures  as  well  as  from  traditions  ;  could  be  as  severe  as  the  Pharisees  in  judging 
others,  and  as  indulgent  towards  themselves.  This  distinction  between  the  vofxiKoi  and  the 
others  confirms  the  originality  of  Luke.  Strauss  and  De  Wette  think  that  these  interlocu- 
tions of  other  persons,  giving  occasion  to  new  turns  of  the  discourse — a  sort  of  table-talk — 
belong  merely  to  the  peculiar  dress  which  Luke  gives  to  the  account ;  but  it  appears  to  me, 
on  the  contraiy,  that  their  apt  adaptation  to  the  several  speakers  is  a  strong  proof  of  the 
originality  of  the  narrative.  They  belong  to  the  very  character  of  table  conversation  ;  and 
their  faithful  and  accurate  transmission  may  be  easily  accounted  for  ;  they  were  probably 
again  and  again  repeated,  and  finally,  in  aid  of  memory,  committed  to  writing.  Any  ar- 
gument against  the  verisimilitude  of  these  accounts,  drawn  from  the  modem  etiquette  of 
the  table,  is  totally  out  of  place,  and  valueless. 

*  We  see  from  Luke,  xi.,  53,  compared  with  xii.,  1,  that  the  conversation  was  con- 
tinued. The  transition  is  not  managed  with  the  art  that  we  should  look  for  in  a.  Jicti- 
tious  naiTative  ;  had  Luke  invented  the  dialogue,  he  would  hai'dly  have  joined  so  awk- 
wardly, without  any  connecting  link,  the  table  conversation  with  the  discourse  afterward 
delivered  to  the  multitude.  But  our  assertion  that  Luke,  in  describing  the  table-talk  with 
what  preceded  and  followed,  has  actually  given  us  a  real  scene  from  the  life  of  Christ,  does 
not  imply  there  is  nothing  in  the  statement  that  belongs  in  another  place.  Things  are  re- 
peated here  which  we  find  often  in  both  Matthew  and  Luke.  The  case  was  probably  as 
tollows  :  an  original  body  of  discourse,  e.  g.,  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  a  conversation  on 
some  special  occasion,  at  table  or  elsewhei'e,  was  handed  down  and  written,  subsequently, 
in  particular  memoirs.  Other  separate  expressions,  not  specifically  connected  with  theu), 
were  also  handed  down,  and  were  incorporated  in  suitable  places  in  the  larger  discourses, 
tlie  more  effectually  to  secure  their  preservation  and  transmission.  Such  may  have  been 
tlie  case  in  the  passage  before  us  ;  e.  g.,  xi.,  49,  for  example,  which  is  given,  in  its  original 
form,  in  Christ's  last  anti-Pliarisaic  discourse.  Matt.,  xxiii.,  3-1. 

t  We  do  not  know  how  far  the  leaven  of  the  Pharisees  did  succeed  in  poisoning  the 
heart  of  an  Iscariot.  The  caution  in  the  text  was  obviously  occasioned  by  the  pretended 
friendship  of  the  Pharisee  who  invited  Christ  to  breakfast,  and  by  the  captious  questions. 


THE  POWER  OF  TRUTH.  249 

After  this  note  of  warning,  which  probably  perturbed  their  minds,  he 
allowed  them,  for  their  comfort,  to  catch  a  glimpse  of  the  coming  tri- 
umphs of  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  of  the  victories  which  his  truth 
should  achieve.  The  craft  of  men,  he  told  them,  should  not  check  its 
progress  ;  it  should  make  its  way  by  the  power  of  God.  His  truth,  as 
yet  veiled  and  covered,  was  to  be  brought  to  the  knowledge  of  all  men. 
"  For  there  is  nothing  covered  that  shall  not  be  revealed  ;  and  hid,  that 
shall  not  he  hiotvn.  What  I  tell  you  in  darkness,  that  speak  ye  in  light : 
and  what  ye  hear  in  the  ear,  that  'preach  ye  upon  the  house-tops  (the  flat 
roofs  of  Eastern  dwellings)."*  And  with  this  promise,  too,  is  connect- 
ed an  exhortation  to  firmness  and  steadfastness  in  their  struggles  for 
the  truth  :  "  i?e  not  afraid  of  them  that  kill  the  body,'"]  &c. 

put  to  him  under  pretence  of  securing  his  opinions  on  important  points.  We  do  not  find 
the  passage  iu  as  original  a  form  in  Matt,  xvi.,  6  ;  the  Pharisees  are  connected  (as  is  often 
done  in  Matt.)  with  the  Sadducees  ;  a  connexion,  as  we  have  remarked  before,  not  natural 
or  probable.  It  is  difficult  to  conceive  how  Christ  could  have  connected  the  doctrine  of  the 
Pharisees  with  that  of  the  Sadducees  ;  or  how  he  could  have  warned  his  disciples  against 
the  influence  of  the  latter,  to  which,  from  their  own  religions  stand-point,  and  the  circle  of 
society  iu  which  they  moved,  they  certainly  were  not  expo.sed.  Schnechenhtrger  (Stud. 
A.  Geist.  Wiirtemb.,  vi.,  1,  48),  indeed,  says  that  the  doctrine  of  the  Pharisees  could  not 
liave  been  alluded  to  either,  because  Christ  recommends  the  latter  himself  (Matt.,  xxiii., 
3).  But  we  cannot  agree  with  him  ;  Christ's  object,  in  the  passage  quoted,  is  to  contrast 
the  rigid  precepts  of  the  Pharisees  with  their  practice.  It  was  the  example  of  their  life 
that  the  disciples  were  to  guard  against ;  but  as  their  righteousness  was  to  exceed  that  of 
the  Pharisees,  they  were  enjoined  to  live  up  even  to  the  strict  precepts  of  that  sect,  so 
that  none  might  be  able  to  accuse  them  of  violating  the  law.  But  surely  there  was  nothing 
in  this  inconsistent  with  opposition,  on  Christ's  part,  to  the  doctrines  of  the  Pharisees  in 
other  respects  ;  and  proofs  of  such  opposition  abound  in  the  Evangelists.  It  is  possible, 
from  the  connexion  in  Matt.,  that  Christ  may  have  given  his  warning  iu  view  of  Pharisaic 
ideas  of  the  kingdom  of  God  and  of  the  signs  of  its  appearance,  and  that  the  figure  of  the 
leaven  may  have  been  intended  to  apply  to  this  ;  but  yet  it  is  more  natural  to  explain  it  as 
alluding  (in  Luke's  sense)  to  the  hypocrisy  of  the  sect,  which  Christ  had  just  before  con- 
demned. In  Mark,  viii.,  15,  indeed,  no  other  sense  is  admissible  ;  the  disciples  might  be 
warned  against  the  hypocrisy  of  Herod  Antipas,  but  not  against  his  doctrine.  It  may,  in- 
deed, be  said  that  Lukes  version  is  the  original  one  ;  that  Matthew,  as  was  usual  with  hira, 
added  Sadducees  to  Pharisees ;  and  that  Mark,  finding  this  unsuitable,  substituted  Herod. 
In  answer  to  this,  Christ  may  have  employed  the  phrase  more  than  once.  In  the  case  of 
Herod,  the  caution  was  not  uncalled  for;  the  disciples  might  have  been  deceived  by  his 
wish  to  see  Jesus,  although  he  wished  it  with  no  good  intentions.  Mark  probably  employ- 
ed a  diflFereut  and  original  account ;  and,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  the  substitution  of  the 
Sadducees  for  Herod  was  unlikely  :  it  is  not  known  that  Herod  was  a  Pharisee. 

*  In  Matt.,  X.,  26,  27,  these  words  are  incorporated  into  the  discourse  at  the  mission  of 
the  Apostles,  in  which  several  other  passages  are  out  of  place.  Their  form  is  probably 
more  accurately  given  in  Matt,  than  in  Luke  ;  in  the  former,  it  is  what  they  hear  that  is  to 
be  proclaimed  ;  in  the  latter,  what  they  speak ;  for  at  that  time  the  disciples  themselves 
did  not  fully  miderstand  and  utter  the  truth  among  themselves.  It  was  only  to  become 
plain  to  them  at  a  later  period. 

t  Other  things  are  added,  after  Luke,  xii.,  5,  probably  out  of  their  proper  connexion  ; 
especially  the  "blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Ghost,"  of  which  we  have  spoken  before  (p. 
243).  I  cannot  adopt  the  interpretation  of  Schleiemiacher,  which  is  adapted  to  the  passage 
as  if  this  were  its  proper  place. 


250  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

§  168.   Christ  Heals  a  Paralytic  at  Capernaum,  and  tJic  Pharisees  ac 

cuse  him  of  Blasjjhcmy. —  The  Accusation  Repelled.     (Matt.,  ix.,  1 

Mark,  ii.,  1  ;   Luke,  v.  17.) 

The  attack  made  upon  Christ  at  Jerusalem  involved,  as  we  have 
seen,  two  charges,  viz.,  that  he  violated  the  law,  and  that  he  assumed 
a  power  and  dignity  to  which  no  man  could  have  a  right.  The  Phari- 
sees continued  their  persecutions,  on  the  same  grounds,  in  Galilee 
also,  where  his  labours  oftei-ed  them  many  points  of  assault.  But 
against  all  such  attacks  his  Divine  greatness  only  displayed  itself  the 
more  conspicuously. 

On  one  occasion  he  returned  to  Capernaum  from  one  of  his  preach- 
ing tours,  and  when  his  arrival  was  known  many  gathered  around  him. 
Some  sought  him  to  hear  the  words  of  life  from  his  lips  ;  to  obtain  help 
for  their  bodies  or  their  souls  ;  others,  doubtless,  with  hostile  intent,  to 
put  captious  questions,  and  act  as  spies  upon  his  words  and  actions  ; 
and  curiosity,  too,  had  done  its  part ;  so  that  the  door  of  the  house  was 
beset  with  people.  The  Saviour  was  interrupted  in  his  teaching  by  a 
great  noise  without.  A  man  palsied  in  all  his  limbs,  tormented  by  pain 
of  body  and  anguish  of  heart,  had  caused  himself  to  be  carried  thither. 
His  disease  may  have  been  caused  by  sinful  excesses  ;  or  it  may  have 
so  awakened  his  sense  of  guilt  as  that  he  felt  it  to  be  a  punishment  for 
his  sins  ;  but,  be  this  as  it  may,  the  disease  of  liis  body  and  the  distress 
of  his  soul  seem  to  have  been  closely  connected,  and  to  have  reacted 
upon  each  other.*  Both  required  to  be  healed,  in  order  to  a  radical 
cure.  Though  the  bodily  ailment  was  a  real  one,  and  not  due  to  a 
psychical  cause,  still,  such  was  the  reciprocal  action  of  spirit  and  body, 
that  the  spiritual  anguish  had  first  to  be  remedied.  And,  on  the  other 
hand,  as  the  disease  seemed  to  be  a  punishment  for  sin,  he  needed,  for 
the  healing  of  his  soul,  a  sensible  pledge  of  the  pardon  of  his  sins  ;  and 
such  a  pledge  he  was  to  find  in  the  cure  of  his  palsy. 

Four  men  carried  the  couch  on  which  the  sick  man  lay ;  but  the 
throng  was  so  great  that  they  could  not  make  their  way  through.  The 
palsied  man  was  anxious  to  see  the  Saviour,  by  whom  he  hoped  to  be 
relieved.  Entrance  by  the  door  was  impossible ;  but  the  Oriental 
mode  of  building  afforded  a  means  of  access,  to  which  they  at  once 
had  recourse.  Passing  up  the  stairs,  which  led  from  the  outside  to  the 
flat  roof  of  the  house,t  they  made  an  opening  by  removing  jiart  of  the 
tiles,  and  let  the  couch  down  into  an  upjier  chamber. 

*  Schleicrmacher  concluded,  from  the  great  pains  that  were  taken,  and  the  anasual 
means  tliat  were  resorted  to  to  bring  the  sick  man  to  Christ,  that  the  Saviour  was  about 
to  depart  immediately  from  the  city.  But  Mark's  account  shows  that  he  had  just  returned, 
and  that  a  vast  crowd  had  gathered  about  him.  A  momentary  exacerbation  of  the  sick 
man's  sufferings  may  have  caused  the  haste  ;  but  we  do  not  luiow  enough  about  his  case 
to  decide  this. 

t  The  accounts  of  Mark  and  Luke  bear  throughout  the  vivid  stamp  of  cyc-witnessea. 


THE  PARALYTIC  HEALED.  251 

Christ's  first  words  to  the  sick  man,  addressed  to  his  longing  and 
faith,  were,  "  Son,  thy  sins  he  forgiven  thee;"  and  this  balm,  pom-ed 
into  the  wounded  spirit,  prepared  the  way  for  the  healing  of  his  cor- 
poreal malady.  ^ 

The  Pharisees,  always  on  the  watch,  seized  upon  this  opportunity  to 
renew  their  accusations ;  he  had  claimed  a  fulness  of  power  which 
belonged  to  God  alone  ;  the  power,  namely,  to  forgive  sins.  Perceiv- 
ing their  irritation,  he  appealed  to  a  fact  which  could  not  be  denied, 
as  proof  that  he  claimed  no  power  which  he  could  not  fully  exercise. 
["  Whether  is  it  easier  to  say,  Thy  sins  he  forgiven  thee ;  or  to  say. 
Arise  and  walk?  But  that  ye  may  knoio  that  the  Son  of  Man  hath 
power  on  earth  to  forgive  sins*  {then  saith  he  to  the  sick  of  the  j^alsy). 
Arise,  take  up  thy  bed,  and  go  unto  thy  house.  And  he  arose,  and  de- 
parted to  his  houseP\  "  It  is  easy  to  say,  Thy  sins  be  forgiven  thee ; 
for  if  these  words  really  produce  any  result,  it  could  not  be  perceptible 
to  the  senses,  and,  for  that  reason,  the  lack  of  the  result  could  not 
convict  an  impostor  ;t  but  he  who  says  Arise  and  walk  must  really 
possess  the  power  which  his  words  claim,  or  his  untruth  will  be  im- 
mediately exposed." 

And  \\\e  fact  that  the  Divine  power  of  his  words  revivified  the  dead 

The  unusual  feature  of  the  event  is  related  in  the  simplest  possible  way,  without  a  trace 
of  exaggeration ;  and  it  is  all  in  perfect  keeping  with  Oriental  life.  Strauss  assumes, 
without  the  slightest  ground,  that  these  accounts  are  exaggerated  copies  of  Matthew's 
(ix.,  1).  which  is  much  the  most  simple.  We  have  far  more  reason  to  take  it  the  other  way, 
and  consider  Matthew's  as  an  abridged  statement,  the  main  object  of  which  was  to  report 
what  Christ  said,  and  not  to  give  a  full  detail  of  the  circumstances.  Strauss  saj-s,  further, 
that  the  words,  "when  he  saio  their  faith,"  gave  occasion  for  the  invention  of  the  story  of 
the  letting  down  of  the  bier  through  the  roof,  &c.  Let  us  look  at  this.  If  Jesus  set  so  high 
a  value  upon  the  faith  of  the  men,  he  did  it,  either  because  he  saw  their  faith  by  that 
glance  of  his  which  searched  men's  hearts,  or  because  they  gave  some  outward  sign  of  it. 
[Strauss  would  not  be  likely  to  admit  the  first,  and  the  second]  is  precisely  met  by  the 
statement  of  Luke.  Moreover,  an  invention  of  this  kind  would  have  been  utterly  incon- 
sistent with  the  spirit  of  early  Christianity,  which  had  too  high  a  conception  of  Christ's 
power  to  pierce  the  thoughts  of  men  to  suppose  that  he  needed  any  outward  sign  of  a 
really  existing  faith.  Again,  if  it  be  agreed  that  admittance  could  be  had  by  a  door  in  the 
roof,  it  may  be  questioned  whether  such  a  door  would  be  large  enough  to  admit  a  couch 
Bat,  probably,  no  such  door  existed  in  Eastern  houses.  Joseph.,  Archseol.,  1.  xiv.,  xv.,  §  12, 
confirms  this.  Herod  I.  had  taken  a  village,  in  which  there  were  many  of  the  enemy's 
soldiers;  part  of  them  were  taken  on  the  roofs,  and  then,  it  is  said,  "rovi  dpofovi  twv  oiKiav 
K  a  T  a  a  K  d t:  T  (0  v,  eixT)iea  ra  kcitu)  ti^v  nrpaTiwruiv  tiipa  aOpduii  aTTCiWrjiJiievoiv."  Even  those  who 
suppose  Mark's  account  to  be  an  imitation  of  Luke's,  or  of  the  a-nopvripovcviia  which  Luke 
followed,  must  still  admit  that  it  implies  an  intimate  acquaintance  with  the  construction 
of  Eastern  houses.  Had  there  been  a  way  of  getting  through  the  roof  otherwise,  he  would 
not  have  said  that  they  broke  it.  As  I  have  said  before,  Mark's  details,  in  many  places, 
imply  that  he  used  a  separate  authority  ;  although  I  cannot  believe,  with  some,  that  his 
Gospel  was  the  original  basis  of  Matthew  and  Luke. 

*  God  forgives  the  sins  in  heaven,  but  Christ,  as  Man,  announces  the  Divine  forgive. 
ness.     "  Son  of  Man"  and  "  in  earth"  are  correlative  conceptions. 

t  It  was  only  in  this  sense,  and  not  with  reference  to  the  act  of  power  in  itself,  that 
Christ  said,  "It  is  easier,"  &c. 


252  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

limbs  of  the  paralytic  proved  that  he  had  the  power,  by  granting  for- 
giveness of  sins,  to  awaken  the  dead  soul  to  a  new  spiritual  life.  In 
this  case  the  two  wei'e  bound  together. 

§  169.    The  Withered  Hand  healed  on  the  Sahhath.  —  The  Ohjeetionn 

of  the  Pharisees  anticipated  and  refuted.      (Mark,  iii.,  1-6  ;    Luke, 

vi.,  6-8  ;  Matt.,  xii.,  10.) 

A  man  with  a  withered  hand  appeared  in  the  synagogue  on  a  certain 
Sabbath  while  Christ  was  teaching,  probably  at  Capernaum.  The 
Pharisees,  perhaps,  had  brought  him  there,  as  they  stood  by  and 
watched  eagerly  to  see  what  Christ  would  do ;  but  the  latter  saw  their 
purpose,  and  acted  with  his  characteristic  calmness  and  confidence. 
Taking  no  notice  whatever  of  his  crafty  foes  until  he  bad  called  the 
sufferer  forth  into  the  midst  of  the  synagogue,  he  then,  by  putting 
an  unavoidable  dilemma  to  the  Pharisees,  anticipated  all  that  they 
could  say :  "/s  it  lawful  to  do  good  on  the  Sahhath  days,  or  to  do  evil; 
to  sai'e  life,  or  to  hill  V  This  question  did  not  offer  a  choice  between 
doing  or  not  doing  a  specific  good,  but  between  doing  the  good  or  its 
opposite  evil ;  and  even  the  Pharisees  could  not  pretend  to  hesitate  as 
to  the  reply.     It  was  precisely  for  this  reason  that  Christ  so  put  it. 

But  was  he  justified  in  this  1  Let  us  see.  The  point  assumed  was, 
that  a  sin  of  omission  is  also  a  sin  of  commission.  Whoever  omits  to  do 
a  good  act  which  he  has  the  power  and,  therefore,  the  calling  to  do, 
is  responsible  for  all  the  evil  that  may  flow  from  his  omission  ;  e.g.,  if 
he  can  save  a  neighbour's  life,  he  ought ;  and  if  he  does  not,  he  is 
guilty  of  his  death.*  So  with  the  case  of  this  lame  man  ;  there  he 
was  ;  Christ  could  cure  him  ;  Christ  ought  to  cure  him  ;  and,  if  he  did 
not,  would  be  responsible  for  the  continuance  of  his  impotency.  That 
it  was  a  duty  to  save  life  on  the  Sabbath  was  taught  even  by  the 
Pharisees  themselves  ;  and,  as  the  spirit  of  the  law  required,  Christ 
extended  the  principle  further.  The  exception  allowed  by  the  Pharisees 
showed  that  the  law  could  not,  unconditionally,  be  literally  fulfilled. 

After  putting  his  question,  he  looked  around  to  see  if  any  of  them 
would  venture  a  reply.  All  were  silent.  Then,  with  Divine  word  of 
power,  he  said  to  the  lame  man,  "  Stretch  forth  tldne  hand;"  and  it 
was  done.t 

*  Wilke':^  objections  (U rernngeliitteii,  p.  191)  to  the  word  airoKTclvai  are  not  decisive.  A 
sti'ong  word  would  naturally  be  used  by  Cbrist  to  give  emphasis  to  the  declaration  tliat,  in 
such  a  case,  not  to  save  life,  \s  to  kill. 

t  It  is  obvious  that  the  accounts  of  this  event  in  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke  were  written 
independently  of  each  other,  from  independent  sources  ;  and  this  seems  to  confirm  their 
truth.  Immediate  orii,nnality,  and  the  vivacity  of  an  eye-witness,  are  strikingly  exhibited 
in  Luke's  account ;  e.  cr.,  before  the  Pharisees  open  their  li[)s,  Ciirist  anticipates  them  both 
by  word  and  deed  ;  which  is  much  more  characteristic  than  Matthew's  statement.  And  as 
for  Christ's  words,  as  given  by  Luke,  being  due  to  a  later  revision  of  the  original,  it  is  the 
less  likely,  because  the  striking  application  of  which  thoy  admit  does  not  lie  upon  the  sur 


THE  INFIRM  HEALED.  253 

§  170.  Cure  of  the.  Infirm  Woman  on  the  Sabbath  ;  the  Pharisees  dis- 
concerted. (Luke,  xiii.,  10.) — Of  the  Dropsical  Ma?i.  (Luke,  xiv.) 
On  another  Sabbath,  while  Chi'ist  was  teaching  in  the  synagogue, 
his  attention  was  arrested  by  a  woman  who  had  gone  for  eighteen  years 
bowed  together  and  unable  to  erect  herself.  He  called  her  to  him 
and  laid  his  hands  upon  her ;  she  was  healed,  and  thanked  God. 

The  ruler  of  the  synagogue,  not  venturing  to  attack  Christ  directly, 
turned  and  reproached  the  people  with,  There  are  six  days  in  which 
men  ought  to  work  ;  in  them,  therefor-e,  come  and  be  healed,  and  not  on  the 
Sabbath  day.  Christ  saw  that  the  reproach  was  intended  for  himself; 
and  exposed  to  the  man  (who  only  illustrated  the  spirit  of  his  whole 
party)  the  hypocrisy  of  his  language,  and  the  contrast  between  Phari- 
saic actions  and  a  Pharisaic  show  of  zeal  for  the  law,  by  the  question, 
Doth  not  each  of  you,  on  the  Sabbath,  loose  his  ox  or  his  ass  from  the 
stall,  and  lead  him  away  to  ivatering  ?  And  shall  not  this  daughter  rf 
Abraham,  lohom  Satan  hath  hound,  lo  !  these  eighteen  years,  be  loosed 
from  this  bond  on  the  Sahhath  day  !* 

Often  the  hidden  aims  of  the  Pharisees  were  veiled  in  the  garb  of 
friendliness  ;  but  the  Saviour  anticipated  their  attacks  before  they  were 
uttered,  and  tlms  often  prevented  their  utterance  at  all.  An  illustra- 
tion of  this  is  to  be  found  in  the  account  given  by  Luke  (xiv.)  of  a  meal 
taken  at  the  house  of  a  Pharisee,  by  whom  he  had  been  invited  on  the 
Sabbath.  Whether  by  accident,  or  by  the  contrivance  of  the  Phari- 
sees, a  dropsical  man  was  there,  seeking  to  be  healed.  Jesus  first 
turned  and  asked  them.  Is  it  lawful  to  heal  on  the  Sabbath  day  ?  When 
they  made  no  reply,  he  touched  the  man  and  cured  him.  When  he 
had  left  the  house,  the  Saviour  saw  that  the  Pharisees  were  disposed 
to  put  an  ill  construction  on  what  he  had  done ;  and  appealed,  as  he 
had  done  before,  to  the  testimony  of  their  own  conduct :  Which  of  you 
shall  have  an  ox  or  an  ass  fallen  into  a  pit,  and  loill  not  straighticay 
jnill  him  02U  on  the  Sabbath  day  ? 

face  at  all.  The  clause  in  Matt.,  xii.,  12,  liton  roXi  'ZdSSuai  kuXw;  izoidv,  gives  a  hint  of  the 
thought  more  fully  developed  in  Luke.  As  to  Matt.,  xii.,  11,  it  may  be  out  of  place  ;  and, 
in  that  case,  may  be  the  same  as  Luke,  xiv.,  5,  in  a  different  form,  the  latter  being  sup- 
posed to  give  the  true  occasion  on  which  the  words  vrere  uttered.  But  it  is  just  as  possi 
ble  that  Christ  uttered  the  same  thought  on  two  occasions  ;  or  that  he  appended  both  illus- 
trations to  his  answer  to  the  question  given  iu  Luke,  vi.,  9. 

*  The  expression  "whom  Satan  hath  bound"  may  imply  a  demoniacal  possession,  a 
state,  perhaps,  of  melancholy  imbecility ;  and  the  words  Ttr^vna  daOcvcias  appear  to  confirm 
this.  But  they  may  also  be  referred  to  the  connexion  between  sin  and  evil  in  general,  or 
in  this  particular  case ;  and  so  a  demoniacal  possession,  in  the  full  sense,  need  not  be  pre- 
supposed. The  terms  may  have  been  used  in  view  of  prevalent  opinions,  or  because  of 
the  peculiar  form  in  which  Christ  wished  to  express  himself  in  this  case. 


254  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

§  17L  The  Strife  for  Precedence  at  Feasts. —  The  Poor,  not  the  Rich,  to 
he  invited. — Parable  of  the  Great  Supper.     (Luke,  xiv.) 

When  the  time  of  sitting  down  to  the  meal  amved,  there  was  a  strife 
for  precedence  among  the  Pharisees,  forming  an  apt  display  of  their 
vanity  and  pride  of  rank  ;  and  illustrating,  in  the  lower  sphere  of  life, 
the  arrogant  and  evil  disposition  which  they  carried  into  the  higher, 
and  which  totally  unfitted  them  for  the  kingdom  of  God.  Christ  took 
the  occasion  to  contrast  this  haughty  spirit  of  theirs  with  spiritual 
prudence,  the  true  wisdom  of  the  kingdom,  by  giving  them,  in  a  para- 
bolic form,  a  rule  of  prudence  for  the  lower  sphere  of  life. 

This  rule  was,  that,  instead  of  appropriating  the  highest  seat,  and 
thus  exposing  one's  self  to  the  shame  of  being  bidden  to  leave  it,  one 
should  rather  seek  the  lowest  place,  and  thus  have  the  chance  of  being 
honoured,  before  all  the  guests,  by  an  invitation  to  a  higher.  It  is  ob- 
vious enough,  on  the  face  of  this,  that  Christ  did  not  intend  it  merely 
as  a  rule  of  social  courtesy;  he  himself  (v.  11)  sets  forth  the  promi- 
nent thought  illustrated,  viz. :  that,  to  be  exalted  by  God,  we  must  hum- 
ble ourselves  ;  that  all  self-exaltation  can  only  deprive  us  of  that  hu- 
mility which  constitutes  true  elevation. 

During  the  repast,  the  Saviour  turned  to  the  host  and  attacked  the 
prevailing  selfishness  that  ruled  all  the  conduct  of  the  Pharisees.  He 
illustrated  this  by  contrasting  that  selfish  hospitality  which  looks  to  a 
recompense  with  the  genuine  love  that  does  good  and  asks  no  return. 
The  heart  that  is  fit  for  the  kingdom  of  Heaven  looks  to  no  earthly 
reward,  but  will  receive,  in  their  stead,  the  heavenly  riches  (v.  12-14) 
of  that  kingdom. 

One  of  the  guests,  probably  wishing  to  turn  the  conversation  from  a 
disagreeable  subject,  seized  upon  the  words  uttered  by  Christ,  to  al- 
lude to  the  blessedness  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  "  Blessed,'"  said  he, 
"  is  he  that  shall  eat  bread  in  the  Idngdom  of  God."  He  may  have 
borrowed  the  figure  from  the  scene  around  him  ;  or,  perhaps,  employed 
it  from  a  tendency  to  Chiliastic  ideas  of  heaven.  On  this,  Christ  took 
occasion  to  show  the  Pharisees,  who  deemed  themselves  secure  of 
a  share  in  the  Messianic  kingdom,  how  utterly  destitute  they  were  of 
its  moral  requisites,  and  how  far  those  whom  they  most  despised  were 
superior  to  them  in  this  i-espect.  He  demanded  a  disposition  of  heart 
ready  to  appreciate  the  true  nature  of  the  kingdom  of  God  as  mani- 
fested and  proclaimed,  and  willing  to  forsake  all  things  else  in  order 
to  lay  hold  of  it. 

To  set  this  vividly  before  their  minds,  he  made  use  of  the  figure  of  a 
supper,  suggested,  doublless,  by  the  circumstances  around  him.  The 
first  invited — those  to  whom  the  servant  is  sent  to  say,  "  Come,  for  all 


THE  SABBATH.  2.55 

things  are  now  reaihf^ — are  the  Pharisees,  who,  on  account  of  their 
life-long  devotion  to  the  study  of  the  law,  and  their  legal  piety,  deemed 
themselves  certain  of  a  call  to  share  in  the  Divine  kingdom.  They  are 
not  accused,  in  the  parable,  of  decided  hostility,  but  of  indifference  to . 
that  which  ought  to  be  their  highest  interest.  Not  knowing  how  to 
value  the  invitation,  they  excuse  themselves  from  accepting  it  under 
various  pretexts.  The  character  of  all  persons,  indeed,  who  are  too 
busy  to  give  heed  to  Christ's  words,  is  here  illustrated. 

When  the  invited  guests  refused  to  come,  a  call  was  sent  forth  for 
"  the  2^oor,  the  ?naij)ied,  the  halt,  and  the  blind  ;^''  guests  uninvited,  in- 
deed, and  not  expecting  such  an  honour.  By  these  we  understand  the 
despised  ones,  the  publicans  and  sinners,  whom  Christ  took  to  his  em- 
brace. 

Still  there  is  room ;  the  highways  must  be  ransacked  ;  that  is,  the 
heathen,  strangers  to  the  Theocratic  kingdom,  are  to  be  summoned  to 
Christ's  kingdom. 

§  172.  The  JPJiarisecs  attack  the  Discijjles  for  j)lucJiing  Corn  on  the  Sab- 
bath.—  Christ  defends  them.     (Luke,  vi.,  1;  Matt.,  xii.,  18.) 

Daring  the  first  or  second  year  of  Christ's  labours  in  Galilee,  he 
walked,  on  the  first  Sabbath  after  the  Passover,*  through  a  corn-field 
with  his  disciples.  The  corn  was  ripe  ;  and  the  disciples,  urged  by 
hunger,  plucked  a  few  ears,  rubbed  them  in  their  hands,t  and  ate  them. 
Some  of  the  Pharisees  (always  on  the  alert)  reproached  them  for  doing 
such  a  thing  on  the  Sabbath  day.  As  the  charge  was,  in  fact,  meant  for 
Christ  himself,  he  replied  to  and  refuted  it ;  and,  not  content  with  bare 
refutation,  he  intimated  a  higher  truth,  which  could  not  be  brought  out 
clearly  and  fully  until  a  later  period. 

First,  he  showed  to  the  Pharisees,  on  their  own  ground,  the  falsity 
of  their  slavish  adherence  to  the  letter  of  the  law.  David,  he  told  them, 
violated  their  principle  in  satisfying  his  hunger  with  the  sacred  bread, 
when  no  other  could  be  had.|  The  Mosaic  law  itself  opposed  it,  inas- 
much as  the  priests  were  necessarily  compelled,  in  the  Temple-service, 
to  infringe  upon  the  Sabbath  rest ;  clearly  showing  that  not  all  labour 
was  inconsistent  with  that  rest,  so  that  the  true  aim  of  the  law  was  kept 
in  view.  But  (he  proceeded,  intimating  the  higher  ti'uth)  if  a  devia- 
tion from  the  letter  of  the  law  was  justifiable  in  the  priests,  because 
engaged  in  the  Temple- service,  how  much  more  in  men  who  were  en- 
gaged in  the  service  of  that  which  icas  greater  than  the  Temple,  the 
highest  manifestation  that  had  been  made  to  mankind.§ 

■ '  T(i£6aTov  hvTtfo-pijiTov,  Luke,  vi.,  1.     Meaning,  if  the  reading  be  correct,  the  fu'st  Sab- 
hath  after  the  second  Easter-day,  when  the  first  sheaf  of  corn  was  presented  in  the  Temple 
t  A  customary  way  of  appeasing  hunger  in  those  lands,  even  to  this  day  ;  of  Rohinsun, 
PaJestine,  ii.,  419  and  430.  t  1  Sam.,  xxi.  ^  Cf  p.  89. 


256  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

Having  thus  ^d^Jdicated  the  disciples,  he  opposed  Hosea,  vi.,  6,  to  that 
idea  of-religion  which  rests  in  outward  forms  and  lacks  the  inward  life ; 
which,  in  this  as  in  other  cases,  was  the  root  of  error  from  which  the 
conduct  of  the  Pharisees  proceeded.  Had  they  known  that  love  is 
greater  than  all  ceremonial  service,  they  would  not  have  been  so  for- 
ward to  condemn  the  innocent.*  For  innocent  the  disciples  were,  who 
had  acted  as  they  did  for  the  sake  of  the  Son  of  Man,  who  is  greater 
than  the  Sabbath,  and  who,  as  Lord  over  all  things,  is  Lord  alsot  of 
the  Sabbath.l  The  Sabbath  was  only  a  means  of  religious  develope- 
ment  up  to  a  certain  period.  That  period  had  arrived  in  the  manifest- 
ation of  the  Son  of  Man,  the  aim  of  all  preparatory  things,  in  whom 
the  original  dignity  of  man  \vas  restored,  the  ideal  of  humanity  realized, 
and  the  interior  life  of  man  made  independent  of  time  and  place.§ 

§  173.    Christ's  Discourse  against  the  merely  outward  Cleanliness  of  the 

Pharisees. — He  explains  the  Discourse  to  his  Discij}lcs.     (Matt.,  xv., 

1-20.) 

The  free  mode  of  life  pursued  by  Christ's  disciples  was  always  an 
object  of  scrutiny  to  the  Pharisees,  who  were  constantly  looking  for 
si,gns  of  heresy.  It  could  not  fail  to  give  them  opportunities  of  fixing 
suspicion  on  the  Master  himself  Once,  when  he  was  surrounded  by 
inquiring  throngs,  they  put  the  question,  involving,  also,  an  accusation, 
why  his  disciples  so  despised  tlie  ancient  traditions  as  to  neglect  the  or- 
dinary ablutions  before  eating. 

His  reply  was,  in  fact,  an  accusation  against  their  whole  system. 
He  told  them,  in  effect,  that  all  their  piety  was  outward  and  hypocrit- 
ical ;  that  they  justified,  by  their  own  arbitrary  statutes,  their  actual 
violation  of  God's  holy  law,  and  thought  to  escape  its  observance  by 
their  sophistical  casuistry.  Having  thus  repulsed  the  Pharisees,  he 
tuiTied  to  the  multitude,  and  warned  them  against  the  Pharisaical  teii- 
dency  so  destructive  to  Jewish  piety,  the  tendency  to  smother  true 
religion  under  a  mass  of  outward  forms.  "  Hear  and  understand  ;  not 
that  which  gocth  into  the  mouth  defileth  a  man  ;  but  that  which  comcth 
out  of  the  mouth,  this  defileth  a  ■man'''  Here  Christ  displays  the  same 
conscious,  lofty  superiority  so  often  manifested  in  his  disputes  with  the 
Pharisees  (as  recorded  in  John,  as  well  as  in  the  synoptical  Gospels) ; 
instead  of  softening  down  the  oftensive  doctrine,  he  presents  it  more 
and  more  forcibly  in  proportion  as  they  take  offence.  The  words  just 
quoted  might  be  interpreted  as  an  attack  upon  the  Mosaical  law  in  re- 

*  The  yuf  in  Matt.,  xii.,  8,  may  refer  either  to  v.  7  or  v.  6 ;  iu  cither  case  it  has  a  con- 
nexion of  thought  with  v.  G.  t  The  Koi,  in  Luke,  vi.,  5,  ag^-ees  well  with  this. 

\  Mark,  ii.,  527,  joins  well  to  this.  The  "  man"  of  v.  27,  refers  to  "  Son  of  Man"  iu  v.  28  ; 
a  reference  that  cannot  he  conceived  as  the  work  of  a  later  hand. 

§  I  consider  myself  justified  in  findinj,'  all  this  in  the  passage,  by  taking  the  words  in 
their  full  meaning,  ajtid  comparing  them  with  other  expressions  of  Christ's. 


TRIAL  MISSIOxN  OF  THE  APOSTLES.  257 

spect  to  food,  &;c.,  and  thus  could  afford  the  Pharisees  a  clear  oppor- 
tunity to  fix  a  charge  of  heresy  upon  him. 

When  the  disciples  called  his  attention  to  the  offence  which  th(> 
Pharisees  had  taken,  he  gave  them  to  understand  that  this  caused  him 
no  uneasiness  :  Every  plant  which  my  heavenly  Father  hath  not  jilcmted 
shall  he  rooted  up  ;  let  them  alone  ;  they  he  blind  leaders  of  the  blind  ; 
both  shall  fall  into  the  ditch.  ("All  merely  human  growths — every 
thing  not  planted  by  God — must  fall ;  the  whole  Pharisaic  system  shall 
come  to  the  ground.  Let  not  their  talk  trouble  you ;  blind  are  they, 
and  those  that  follow  them ;  both  leaders  and  led  are  going  on  to 
destruction.") 

The  disciples  probably  expected  a  different  explanation ;  they  were 
still  too  much  ruled  by  Jewish  views  to  apprehend  correctly  the  full 
force  of  Chiist's  figurative  language.  The  form  of  expression  was 
simple  enough  in  itself;  it  was  the  strange  thought  which  made  it 
difficult.  It  was  only  at  a  later  period  that  even  Peter  could  learn,  and 
that,  too,  by  the  illumination  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  that  every  thing  is 
pure,  for  men,  which  comes  pure  from  the  Creator's  hand.  In  the  case 
before  us,  Peter,  as  spokesman  for  the  disciples,  asked  an  explamation 
of  the  obscure  point.  In  reply,  Christ  first  expressed  his  surprise  that, 
after  having  so  long  enjoyed  his  society  and  teaching,  they  had  made 
so  little  progi'ess  in  religious  knowledge  ;  that  such  a  saying  should 
awake  their  scruples  as  well  as  the  Pharisees'.  "  Do  ye  not  yet  under- 
stand," said  he,  "  that  what  enters  a  man's  mouth  from  without  cannot 
defile  the  interior  life  %  It  is  the  product  of  the  heart,  it  is  that  which 
comes  from  within  that  makes  a  man  unclean.''  This  truth  was  then 
immediately  applied  only  to  the  case  in  point,  viz. :  eating  with  un- 
washed hands;  the  wider  application  of  which  it  was  capable  could 
not  be  unfoklecj  to  them  until  a  much  later  period.* 

§  174.  Trial  Mission  of  the  Apostles  ifi  Galilee.  (Luke,  ix. ;  Matt.,  x.) 
(1.)  01)jects  of  the  Mission.— Powers  of  the  Mis.sionaries. 
The  extended  peiiod  of  time  which  Christ  spent  in  Galilee  was  em- 
ployed, also,  in  the  education  of  the  men  who  wei'e  to  carry  on  his  work 
upon  earth.  The  disciples,  at  first,  accompanied  him  as  witnesses  of 
his  ministry ;  but,  in  order  to  accustom  them  to  independent  labours, 
and  to  test  their  qualifications  for  the  work,  he  sent  them  forth  on  a 
trial  mission.  An  additional  object  was  to  spread,  by  their  agency, 
throuo-h  all  the  tow^is  and  villages  of  Galilee,  the  announcement  that 
the  kingdom  of  God  had  appeai'ed.  He  by  no  means  sent  them  to 
proclaim  the  whole  truth  of  salvation ;  they  were  as  yet  incapable  of 
this ;  and  it  was  at  a  later  period  only  that  he  promised  the  gift  of  the 

*  Cf.  p.  88. 

R 


258  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

Spirit  to  qualify  them  for  it.  So  long  as  He  i-emained  upon  the  earth, 
He  was  the  sole  teacher.  They  were  only  to  proclaim  every  where 
that  the  kingdom  of  God,  the  olyect  of  all  men's  desire,  had  come  ;  to 
point  out  to  the  people  of  Galilee  the  great  grace  of  God  in  calling  the 
Founder  of  that  kingdom  from  their  midst.  Their  present  work  was 
to  be  a  type  of  their  future  one,  when  the  great  work  within  them 
should  be  accomplished.  As  they  were  to  become  bearers  of  the  word, 
the  Spirit,  and  the  powers  of  Christ,  so  preparation  was  already  to  be 
made  for  this,  though  as  yet  incompletely. 

"  Then  he  called  his  tioelve  disciples  together,  and  gave  them  fower 
and  authority  over  all  devils,  and  to  cure  diseases.  And  he  sent  them  to 
proclaim  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  to  heal  the  sick."  We  see  tliat 
Christ  could  communicate  certain  of  the  supernatural  powers  that  dwelt 
in  him  to  those  who  devoted  themselves  to  serve  liim  as  organs.  But 
as  these  powers  emanated  from  the  source  of  Divine  life  in  him,  so  we 
conclude  that  the  degi'ee  in  which  they  were  imparted  to  others  de- 
pended upon  the  degree  in  which  they  had  imbibed  that  life  from  him. 

(2.)  Instructions  to  the  Missionaries. — Reasons  for  the  Exclusion  of  the  Samaritans 
and  Heathen.     (Matt.,  x.,  5-6  ;  Luke,  ix.,  1,  &c.) 

The  disciples  thus  sent  forth  were  to  confirm  the  truth  of  their  an- 
nouncement by  miraculous  acts,  pointing  to  Him  who  gave  the  power 
to  perform  them.  At  first,  the  general  attention  of  the  people  was  only 
to  be  called  to  the  great  epoch  that  had  dawned  ;  the  developement  of 
the  doctrine  of  the  kingdom  was  to  be  left  to  Christ's  own  teaching,  and 
to  the  subsequent  operations  of  his  Spirit.  This  explains  why  he  did 
not  further  direct  the  Apostles  as  to  what  they  sliould  teach.  Their 
mission  was  to  Galilee  alone  ;  and  the  exclusion  of  the  Samaritans  and 
heathen*  is,  therefore,  not  at  all  inconsistent  with  what  we  have  said 
of  Christ's  plan  for  the  universal  establishment  of  his  kino-dom.  All 
the  difficulties  that  have  been  found  in  tliis  restriction  flow  from  con- 
sidering it  apart  from  the  proper  period  of  Christ's  life  to  which  it 
belongs.  During  his  life  on  earth,  His  ministry  was  to  be  confined  to 
the  Jews.  Before  the  kingdom  of  God  could  be  planted  among  the 
heathen  by  the  proclamation  of  his  truth  in  this  new  form,  it  was  neces- 
sary that  the  knowledge  of  it  should  be  fully  developed  in  the  disciples; 
and  this  could  oidy  be  done,  after  his  departure,  by  the  enlightening 
power  of  the  higher  Spirit  that  was  to  be  imparted  to  them.  The  links 
of  the  chain  of  internal  and  external  progress,  by  which  this  last  great 
event  was  to  be  brought  about,  were  closely  bound  to  each  other ;  a 

•  Mattlicw  evidently  connects  many  things  with  the  instructions  given  to  tlie  Apostles  in 
view  of  their_/y".s/  journey,  which,  chronologically,  belong  later,  viz. :  to  those  given  at  the 
mission  of  the  Seventy,  which  he  omits.  But  it  is  likely  that  Luke,  ix.,  1,  seq.,  gives  but 
an  abridgment,  and  we  may  fdl  it  out  from  Matthew. 


TniAL  MISSION  OF  THE  APOSTLES.  259 

premature  developement  would  only  hinder  instead  of  hastening  the 
result.  Before  the  Apostles  could  teach  the  heathen,  or  find  access  to 
their  hearts,  they  had  to  leam  the  peculiarities  of  the  Gospel  itself,  as 
well  as  its  relations  to  the  reliffion  of  the  Old  Testament.  Even  had 
they  succeeded  in  reaching  the  mind  of  the  heathen  with  their  defective 
apprehension  of  Christ's  doctrine,  and  thus  making  Jews  of  them,  it 
would  only  have  been  the  more  difficult  afterward  to  eradicate  the 
laboriously-planted  errors,  and  impart  a  pure  form  of  Christianity. 
But  this  knowledge  was  among  the  things  of  which  Christ  himself  said 
to  his  disciples,  "Ye  cannot  hear  them  now  ;^'  it  was  bound  up  with 
many  truths  that  were  as  yet  veiled  from  them.  Nor  could  he,  con- 
sistently with  his  plan,  as  we  have  above  unfolded  it,*  impart  these 
truths  as  separate  and  ready-made ;  the  fruit  of  knowledge  had  to  grow 
up  in  their  religious  consciousness  from  the  seeds  of  knowledge  sown 
there  by  the  Spirit  of  God. 

The  dii'ection,  therefore,  given  to  the  Apostles,  not  to  go  to  the 
heathen  in  Galilee  and  on  the  border,  necessarily  followed  from  the 
plan  of  Jesus.  "  But,"  it  may  be  asked,  "  why  did  he  not  explain  to 
them  the  grounds  of  this  restriction  V  It  might  be  enough  to  reply  to 
this,  that  it  is  not  likely  that  the  full  instructions,  with  the  reasons  in 
detail,  are  preserved  to  us,  but  only  an  extract  containing  the  most 
essential  features.  But,  apart  from  this,  Christ  could  not  at  that  time 
have  given  them  all  his  reasons ;  for,  in  that  case,  he  must  have  im- 
parted to  them  what  they  could  not  as  yet  comprehend.  They  were 
ihen  unconscious  organs  for  the  execution  of  his  commands. 

But  their  relation  to  the  Jews  was  quite  a  different  thing.  To  the 
latter  they  were  to  impart  no  entirely  new  doctrine  ;  and  there  was, 
therefore,  no  fear,  as  in  the  case  of  the  heathen,  that  they  would 
plant  seeds  of  error  which  would  have  to  be  uprooted  afterward. 
The  Apostles  were  to  take  hold  of  expectations  already  cherished 
among  the  Jews,  and  to  proclaim  that  the  object  of  desire  had  come. 
The  errors  which  yet  biassed  their  own  minds  were  shared  by  the 
Jews  as  a  body  ;  errors  from  which  nothing  but  the  spirit  of  the  Gos- 
pel could  free  either  them  or  the  Jews.  And,  besides,  they  must 
have  received  many  seeds  of  the  higher  life  from  the  society  and  teach- 
ing of  Christ;  and,  in  scattering  these,  they  could  aid  in  preparing  the 
groimd  for  subsequent  culture. 

Perhaps,  also,  the  Saviour,  in  pointing  out  "  the  lost  sliecii  of  the  hoitse 
of  IsraeV  as  the  first  objects  of  their  toil,  had  in  view,  also,  "  other  sheep, 
not  of  this  fold,"]  belonging  to  those  whom  he  had  come  to  collect  into 
one  flock,  under  one  shepherd.  There  was  sufficient  ground,  moreover, 
for  excluding  Samaria  from  the  sphere  of  this  trial-mission,  in  the  brief 
duration  to  which  it  had  to  be  limited  ;  apart  from  the  fact  that  the 

*  Book  iv.,  pt.  i.,  chap.  ii.  t  John,  x.,  16. 


260  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

Apostles  (lid  not  stand  in  the  same  relation  to  the  Samaritans  as  to  the 
Galilean  Jews.  They  were  not  prepared  to  adapt  themselves  to  the 
feelings  of  the  Samaritans,  nor  to  meet  the  controversies  into  which 
they  must  ine^'itably  be  led  among  them  ;  the  way  in  which  the  two 
sons  of  Zebedee  treated  that  people  at  a  later  period  is  proof  of  this. 
There  was  no  danger,  however,  that  the  disciples  would  so  misunder- 
stand Christ  as  to  infer  that  the  Samaritans  were  to  be  excluded  from 
the  kino-dom  of  God  ;  what  they  had  seen  of  his  personal  intercourse 
with  that  people,  and  of  the  love  which  ho  cherished  for  them,  suffi- 
ciently guarded  against  that. 

And  so,  too,  they  could  not  but  infer  that  the  exclusion  of  the  hea- 
then must  not  be  extended  too  far.  Besides,  the  Jews  themselves*  ad- 
mitted that  the  heathen  were  to  obtain  a  certain  shai-e  in  the  kingdom 
of  God,  on  condition  of  observing  the  Jewish  law  ;  and  the  disciples 
could  hardly  think  less  would  be  granted  by  their  Master,  whose  words 
and  actions  breathed  so  very  different  a  spirit. 

(3.)  The  lustniotious  continued;  the  Apostles  enjoined  to  rely  on  Providence. 

Christ  sought  to  train  his  ministers  to  perform  the  duties  of  their  call- 
ino-  without  anxious  care  for  the  future.  He  bade  them  make  no  pro- 
vision for  their  journey,t  but  to  trust  in  God,  who  would  not  see  them 
want  while  faithfully  doing  their  duty ;  to  be  content  with  what  was 
offered  them  ;  to  abide  in  the  first  house  that  was  hospitably  opened  to 
them ;  and  thus,  having  made  one  family  their  home,  to  extend  their 
labours  around  it  as  a  centre.  The  issue  satisfied  them  that  their  Mas- 
ter had  predicted  rightly  ;  they  found,  as  he  had  promised,  all  their 
wants  supplied.|  At  that  time  the  fame  of  Christ's  miracles  had  ren- 
dered the  dispositions  of  the  Galileans  favourable  ;  they  had  to  fight 
no  battles  with  fanatical  enemies.  Moreover,  the  substance  of  their 
teaching  was  not  as  yet  so  inconsistent  with  the  prevailing  modes  of 
thought  as  to  excite  hatred  and  opposition. 

§  175.  Various  Opinions  entertained  of  Jesus.  (Luke,  ix.,  7-9.) 
In  the  mean  time  Christ's  fame  was  spreading  through  all  the  land, 
and  various  opinions  existed  in  regard  to  the  character  of  the  powers 
which  could  not  be  denied.  A  very  small  minority  of  the  people  rec- 
ognized him  as  the  Messiah  ;  but  the  greater  number  exj)ected  that 
when  Messiah  should  come,  he  would  prove  himself  such  by  found  in  (^ 
an  earthly  kingdom  in  visible  glory ;  and  that  his  power  woidd  be  dis- 
played, not  in  a  corner  of  Galilee,  but  in  the  Theocratic  metropolis. 
But  tho.se  who  had  been  impressed  by  the  labours  of  John  the  Baptis 

*  Cf.  p.  88,  89. 

t  This  is  the  essential  part  of  the  instruction ;  differences  of  detail  are  of  no  moment. 

X  Lake,  xxii.,  35. 


FEEDING  OF  THE  FIVE  THOUSAND.  261 

could  hardly  realize  his  total  disappearance;  and  such,  seeing  oreater- 
vvorlcs  done  so  soon  after  his  death,  explained  them  thus  :  "  He  is  risen 
from  the  dead,  and  therefore  might}]  works  do  show  forth  themselves  in 
him'"  (Matt.,  xiv.,  2).  Others  said  that  Elias,  or  one  of  the  ancient 
[)rophets,  had  reappeared,  to  prepare  the  way  for  Messiah's  kingdom. 

It  is  obvious  that  the  impression  produced  by  Christ's  works  caused 
him  to  be  generally  regarded  as  higher  than  John — as  the  highest,  in- 
deed, next  to  Messiah;  but  not  as  Messiah  himsef  on  account  of  the 
false  expectation  above  mentioned.  It  is  no  matter  of  surprise  that 
there  should  have  been  inconsistent  and  contradictory  opinions  at  a  time 
so  disturbed  and  uneasy. 

§  176.  Return  of  the  Apostles. — Miraculous  Feeding  of  the  Five  Thou- 
sand. (Matt.,  xiv.;  Mark,  vi. ;  Luke,  ix.) — Ohjcct  and  Signifcancc 
of  the  Miracle. — Its  Effect  upon  the  Multitude. 

Christ  had  now  spent  a  whole  year  in  Galilee.  The  time  of  the 
Passover  approached,  and  the  Apostles  returned  from  their  mission- 
ary journey.  Multitudes  still  thronged  about  him,  seeking  aid  for 
soul  and  body  ;  the  caravans,  gathering  to  the  Passover,  increased  the 
press.  The  Saviour  did  not  wish  at  once  to  expose  himself  to  the 
dangers  that  threatened  him  at  Jerusalem;  moreover,  he  desired,  for 
a  time,  to  prolong  both  his  ministry  in  Galilee,  and  his  intercoui'se  with 
the  Apostles,  whose  training  for  the  work  was  now  his  first  object. 
He  sought  a  season  of  undisturbed  society  with  them ;  to  receive  the 
report  of  their  first  independent  labours,  and  to  give  them  advice  and 
instruction  for  the  future  (Mark,  vi.,  30,  31).  For  this  purpose,  he  de- 
parted, with  the  disciples,  from  the  neighbourhood  of  Capernaum,  ou 
the  western  shoi'e  of  Genesareth,  to  a  mountain  on  the  eastern  shore, 
at  the  head  of  the  lake,  near  Bcthsaida  Julias.*  But  the  multitude 
took  care  to  see  whither  he  accompanied  his  disciples,  and  immedi- 
ately hastened  after  him.t 

And  here  followed  \l\e  feeding  of  the  fee  thousand.  This  miracle 
formed  the  very  acme  of  Christ's  miraculous  power  •,\  in  it  creative 

*  Luke,  ix.,  10.  The  tetrarch  Philip,  who  raised  the  village  of  Bethsaida  (on  the  east 
side)  to  the  dignity  of  a  city,  distinguished  it  from  the  village  of  the  same  name  on  the 
west  side,  by  adding  the  name  Julias,  from  the  emperor's  daughter  (Joseph.,  Archacol., 
xviii.,  2,  §  1).  It  is  not  strange  that  the  name  nT''!(~n*3  (moaning  &  place  ofj/sk,  a.Jish- 
iiig-town),  should  be  applied  to  two  places  on  different  sides  of  a  lake  aboundijig  in  fish. — 
Robinson's  Palestine,  vol.  iii.,  p.  566. 

t  It  appears  possible,  from  John,  vi.,  5,  that  Christ  only  withdrew  to  the  east  shore  after 
spending  a  great  part  of  the  day  with  the  multitude  on  the  west  side.  In  this  case  it 
would  be  natural  for  Christ  to  express,  first,  a  care  for  their  corporeal  wants,  when  he  saw 
them,  after  spending  nearly  the  whole  day  without  food,  follow  him  at  a  late  hour.  What 
was  done  upon  the  two  shores,  therefore,  may  perhaps  have  been  blended  together  in  the 
synoptical  accounts.  J  Cf.  p.  152. 


26-2  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

egency  was  most  strikingly  prominent,  although  it  was  not  purely  cre- 
ation out  of  nothing,  but  a  multiplication  of  an  existing  substance,  or  a 
strengthening  of  its  ]iroperties.  For  this  very  reason,  there  is  more 
excuse  in  regard  to  this  than  some  other  of  the  miracles  for  inquiring 
whether  the  subjective  element  of  the  account  can  be  so  separated  from 
the  objective  as  to  offer  a  different  view  of  the  nature  of  the  act. 

A  theory  has  accordingly  been  constructed  to  do  away  with  the  mi 
raculous  character  of  the  act,  and  explain  it  as  a  result  of  Christ's  spir- 
itual agency,  brought  about  in  a  natural  way.  It  amounts  to  this  :  the 
feeding  of  the  vast  multitude  with  five  loaves  and  two  fishes  was  ac- 
ccnnplished  by  the  example  and  moral  influence  of  Christ,  which  in- 
duced the  better-provided  to  share  their  food  with  the  rest,  Christ's 
spirit  of  love  bringing  rich  and  poor  to  an  equality,  as  it  has  often  done 
in  later  Christian  times.  So,  then,  the  result  was  rightly  judged  to 
have  been  brought  about  by  the  Spirit  of  Christ ;  but  the  spiritual  in- 
fluence was  translated  into  a  material  one ;  Christ's  power  over  men's 
hearts  into  a  power  exerted  by  him  over  nature  ;  and  the  intermediate 
link  in  the  chain  was  thus  omitted. 

Now,  although  it  is  jmssihle  that  an  account  of  the  miracle  might  have 
originated  in  some  such  way  as  this — examples  of  the  like  are  not  want- 
ing in  the  Middle  Ages — the  details  of  the  narrative,  in  all  the  differ- 
ent versions  of  it,  are  irreconcilable  with  the  hypothesis.  Had  part 
of  the  people  been  supplied  with  provisions,  the  disciples  must  have 
known  it ;  on  the  contrary,  according  to  the  narrative,  they  had  no 
such  thought;  nothing  remained  for  them  but  to  "■send  the  mvltitude 
away  into  the  villages  to  buy  victuals.'"  Had  they  supposed  that  the 
caravans  were  partly  supplied  with  food  for  their  journey  to  Jerusa- 
lem, it  would  have  been  most  natural  for  them  to  say  to  Christ,  "  Thou 
who  canst  so  control  the  hearts  of  men,  speak  the  word,  that  they  may 
share  with  the  needy."  But  there  is  no  plausibility  in  the  hypothesis 
that  there  were  provisions  on  the  ground  ;  the  multitudes  had  not  come 
from  a  great  distance ;  and  there  were  villages  at  hand  where  food 
could  be  bought ;  so  that  there  was  no  inducement  to  carry  it  with 
them.  Moreover,  had  Christ  seen  such  a  misunderstanding  of  his  act 
arise,  he  would,  instead  of  turning  the  self-deception  of  the  people  to 
his  own  advantage,  have  taken  occasion,  by  setting  the  case  truly  be- 
fore them,  to  illustrate,  by  so  striking  an  illustration,  what  the  spirit 
of  love  could  do.  Finally,  the  narrative,  as  given  by  John  (vi.,  15), 
puts  this  theory  wholly  out  of  the  question.  So  powerfully  wore  tin; 
multitude  impressed  by  what  Christ  had  done,  that  they  \vished  to  take 
Jesus  as  Messiah,  and  make  him  king.  The  act  must  have  been  ex- 
traordinary indeed  that  could  produce  such  an  effect  as  this  upon  a 
people  under  the  dominion  of  the  senses,  and  not  at  all  susceptible  of 
any  immediately  spirittml  agency  which  Christ  might  have  employed. 


FEEDING  OF  THE  FIVE  THOUSAND.  263 

The  miracle  was  not  wrought  without  reason ;  the  circumstances 
which  demanded  it  may  be  thus  stated  :  A  multitude  of  persons,  trav- 
elling to  Jerusalem  for  the  Passover,  followed  Christ  from  the  western 
to  the  eastern  shore ;  he  had  spoken  the  words  of  Life  to  them,  and 
healed  the  sick.  They  were  chained  the  whole  day  to  his  presence, 
and  evening  came  iipon  them.  The  sick  who  had  just  been  healed 
were  without  food ;  they  could  not  go,  fasting,  to  the  villages  to  obtain 
it.*  Here,  then,  was  a  call  for  his  assisting  love ;  and,  natural  sus- 
tenance failing,  his  miracle-working  power  must  supply  the  lack. 

The  effect  of  the  miracle  illustrates  for  us  the  mode  of  Christ's  work- 
ing in  all  ages ;  both  in  temporal  and  spiritual  things,  the  spirit  that 
proceeds  from  him  makes  the  greatest  results  possible  to  the  smallest 
means ;  that  which  appears,  as  to  quantity,  most  trifling,  multiplies  it- 
self, by  his  Divine  power,  so  as  to  supply  the  wants  of  thousands.  The 
physical  miracle  is  for  us  a  type  of  the  spiritual  one  which  the  power 
of  his  words  works  in  the  life  of  mankind  in  all  time.t 

*  John's  Gospel,  however,  differs  from  others  in  this  point  (vi.,  5),  in  statins'  that  Christ 
himself  asked  the  question,  "  Whence  shall  u-e  hvy  bread  ?"  Sec,  before  any  thing  else  was 
done.  We  find,  therefore,  by  comparison  with  the  other  Gospels,  that  John  has  omitted 
part  of  the  details.  Christ  would  not  make  this  the  Jirst  question,  when  a  multitude  stood 
before  him  in  want  of  spiritual  as  well  as  bodily  ^relief;  nor  is  it  likely  that  he  meant  to 
prepare  the  way  for  the  miracle  from  the  beginning.  From  John,  vi.,  17,  also,  we  gather 
that  the  event  took  place  towards  evening,  leaving  room  for  the  inference  [apart  from  the 
accounts  in  the  other  Gospels]  that  the  multitude  had  been  about  Christ  some  time.  In  this 
statement,  then,  John  plunges  at  once  into  the  midst  of  the  account,  without  the  vividness 
of  detail  which  u.sually  marks  his  Gospel.  On  the  other  hand  (cf  Matt.,  xv.,  32),  it  is  not 
likely  that  Christ  waited  for  an  intimation  from  the  disciples  before  manifesting  his  ever- 
watchful  love  and  compassion ;  nor  was  it  his  custom  to  work  a  miracle  suddenly,  but  in  a 
naturally-suggested  and  prepared  way.  All  difficulties  disappear  if  we  adopt  the  view  of 
note  t,  p.  261. 

t  Tlie  question  arises,  whether  the  miracle  recorded  iu  Matt.,  xv.,  32,  seq.,  and  Mark,  viii., 
1-8,  is  different  from  the  one  of  which  we  have  just  treated,  or  whether  it  is  the  same,  dif- 
ferently stated.  The  fact  that  the  narratives  are  suhstantially  alike,  and  differ  iu  matters 
comparatively  unimportant,  may  be  urged  in  favour  of  the  latter  view  ;  but  the  relative  dif- 
ferences of  measure  (4000  instead  of  5000,  with  sei:eii  loaves  instead  oi  five,  and  the  multi- 
tude spending  three  days  with  Christ)  favour  the  former.  The  resemblances  may  be  as- 
cribed to  the  one  account's  having  been  modelled  after  the  other.  Matt.,  xvi.,  9,  10,  would 
not  prove  them  different ;  that  passage  may  have  been  modified  at  a  later  period,  when 
the  facts  were  presupposed  to  be  different,  without  affecting  its  veracity.  The  localities 
might  help  to  decide  the  question.  The  first  miracle  took  place,  as  we  have  said,  on  the 
eastern  side  of  Geuesareth,  near  a  mountain.  The  locality  which  we  assign  to  the  second 
will  depend  upon  our  answer  to  a  question  still  debated,  viz.,  where  Magdala,  to  which 
Chri.st  passed  over  (Matt.,  xvi.,  39),  was  situated,  According  to  the  Talmudical  accounts 
[Lightfoot,  Chorograph.,  c.76;  Wetstcin,  in  loc),  it  was  near  Gadara,  consequently,  on  the 
eastern  side  of  the  sea.  If  this  be  so,  the  second  miracle  must  have  been  wrought  upon  a 
mountain  on  the  u-estern  shore ;  thus  assigning  a  locality  to  it  different  from  that  of  the  first. 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  there  is  shown  to  this  day.  south  of  Capernaum,  on  the  road  to 
Tiberias,  a  village  called  el-Mejdd  (Robinson),  a  name  corresponding  to  the  ancient  Mag 
dala  (Burckhardi.  Genn.  trans.,  ii.,  559  ;  cf  Roscnmuller,  Handbuch  der  Biblischen  Alter- 
thumskunde,  ii.,  73).  This  agrees  with  the  Talmudic  accounts  that  place  the  site  near 
Tiberias ;  but  not  so  well  with  the  one  quoted  above,  namely,  that  it  was  near  Gadara  ; 
but  cannot  the  Migdal  Gadar,  therein  mentioned,  be  otherwise  explained  ?    Cf  Oesenius's 


264  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

Up  to  this  time  Christ  had  only  impressed  the  multitude  with  the 
Lelief  that  he  was  a  mighty  Prophet,  whose  appearance  was  prepara- 
tory to  the  Messianic  era.  But  this  climax  of  his  miracle-working 
power  produced  one,  also,  in  their  opinions.  "  He  that  can  do  sudi  a 
miracle  can  be  no  other  than  Messiah ;  we  must  do  homage  to  him  as 
Theocratic  king,  and  urge  him  to  establish  his  kingdom  among  us." 
Plans  of  this  sort  Christ  had  to  evade ;  and  he  returned  alone  to  the 
mountain. 

§  177.   Christ  Walks  upon  the  Waters.     (John,  vi.,  16  ;  Matt.,  xiv,,  22  ; 

Mark,  vi.,  45.) 
Dismissing  the  disciples  at  evening,  he  commanded  them  to  sail 
across  to  the  western  shore,  in  the  direction  of  Bethsaida  and  Caperna- 
um. They  departed,  but  sailed  for  a  while  slowly  along  the  shore,  ex- 
pecting Christ  to  come  to  them  after  he  had  dismissed  the  multitude  ;  but 
they  waited  in  vain.  It  was  now  dark  ;  they  became  aware  that  their 
expectations  would  not  be  fulfilled,  and  took  their  way  for  the  other 
shore.  But  the  wind  was  against  them  ;  they  had  to  contend  with 
storm  and  waves.  After  struggling  with  the  elements  in  great  anxiety 
for  more  than  an  hour  and  a  half  in  the  open  sea,  they  strove  again  tG 
reach  the  shore  which  they  had  left.  While  they  were  toiling  to  ac- 
complish this,  suddenly,  between  three  and  six  in  the  morning,  Christ 
appeared  to  them  walking  on  the  waters,  and  approaching  the  vessel.* 

remark  on  tlie  passage  cited;  Burckhardt,  ii.,  1056;  Rohiiison,  iii.,  529;  Matt.,  xvi.,  i. 
(Pharisees  meeting  Christ),  agrees  better  with  the  supposition  of  the  u-estern  shore.  If, 
then,  Mdgdala  was  on  the  icestern  shore,  the  second  miracle,  hko  the  first,  must  have  oc- 
curred ou  the  eastern ;  the  direction  of  their  subsequent  passage  across  the  lake  would 
agree  pretty  well.  Then  the  general  geographical  course  (indicated  iu  Matt.,  xvi.,  13) 
would  accord  very  well  with  Matt.,  xv.,  21  ;  and  all  this  favours  the  opinion  that  we  have 
two  reports  of  one  and  the  same  miracle.  There  is  an  important  difference  between 
Matt.,  XV.,  39,  and  xiv.,  22;  the  latter  stating  that  Christ  sent  his  disciples  awaj-  first  by 
ship;  the  former,  that  he  went  immediately  himself;  but  this  might  have  arisen  from  an 
omission  in  the  former  passage  ;  just  as  we  find  Luke,  also,  s.aying  nothing  of  it.  The 
probability  of  the  miracle  having  been  wrought  twice  is  lessened  by  the  view  that  we  have 
taken  of  it  as  constituting  the  climax  of  his  miraculous  works.  We  recognize  in  Matt.,  xv., 
29 ;  xvi.,  12,  a  break  in  the  historical  and  local  connexion  ;  and,  iu  fact,  we  frequently  find 
iu  this  document,  although  an  original  and  evangelical  one,  the  same  expressions  and  events 
narrated  more  than  once  ;  sometimes  in  longer,  sometimes  in  shorter  forms. 

*  If  it  were  even  grammatically  possible  to  translate  Itu  rtii  ^aXdcar^i  "along  the  sea," 
and  iTTi  nil/  SdXaaaav  ''towards  the  sea."  although  the  connexion  be  unnatural  (thus  supposing 
that  Christ  had  gone  in  a  half  circle  to  the  other  side  of  the  shore,  and  so  reached  the  dis- 
ciples, who  had  slowly  toiled  along  the  shore)  ;  if  this,  I  say,  were  grammatically  possible, 
such  a  construction  is  directly  opposed  to  the  tenor  and  intention  of  the  nan-ative.  This  is 
most  obvious  in  .Tohn's  account,  which  is  the  most  direct  and  simple,  and  has  least  of  tlio 
miraculous  about  it.  Suppose  the  disciples  to  have  sailed  25  or  30  furlongs,  not  across,  but 
along  the  sea,  and  then,  seeing  Jesus  on  the  shore,  to  have  taken  liira  in  ;  how  will  this 
agree  with  John's  statement  (vi.,  21),  "  immcdiatcli/  the  ship  was  at  the  land,  whilher  they 
vent !"  If  they  saw  Jesus,  then,  on  the  shore,  it  must  have  been  tlie  n-estern  shore  ;  and 
what  meaiiiiig  could  tiiere  be,  iu  that  case,  in  tlieir  taking  him  into  the  vessel  ?  Cf  Lncke't 
•-xcellent  remarks,  in  loc. 


THE  SYNAGOGUE  AT  CAPERNAUM.        265 

Bewildered  with  fear,  they  did  not  recognize  the  Saviour  amid  the 
storm  and  darkness,  but  thought  they  saw  "  a  spirit.''''*  But  Christ 
called  to  them,  "It  is  I;  be  not  afraid."  The  well-known  voice 
turned  their  fear  into  joy.  They  sought,  longingly,  to  take  him  into 
the  vessel ;  but,  before  they  could  succeed  in  it,  they  were  wafted  to 
the  shore  by  a  favourable  wind.  This,  too,  was  full  of  import  to  them; 
cis  soon  as  Christ  made  himself  known,  every  thing  took  a  joyful  turn.f 

§  178.   Christ  in  the  Synagogue  at  Capernaum.     (John,  vi.) 
(1.)  The  Carnal  Mind  of  the  Multitude  rebuked. 

Christ  met  certain  of  the  eye-witnesses  of  the  miraculous  feeding  of 
the  five  thousand  in  the  synagogue  at  Capernaum,  either  on  the  Sab- 
bath, or  on  some  other  day.ij:  They  were  surprised,  and,  therefore,  the 
more  gratified,  at  his  sudden  appearance,  since  they  had  left  him  on 
the  eastern  shore  ;  and  their  pleasure  was  shared  by  others  whom  they 
had  told  of  the  miracle.  Doubtless  they  were  full  of  expectation  that 
he  would  work  new  wonders  to  confirm  his  Messiahship,  and  gratify 
their  carnal  longings.  But  the  higher  their  hopes  of  this  kind  were, 
the  deeper  was  their  disappointment,  and  the  greater  their  rage,  when 
lie  offered  them  something  entirely  different  from  what  they  sought. 
The  miracle  could  produce  no  faith  in  those  who  were  destitute  of  a 
spiritual  mind ;  their  enthusiasm,  canially  excited,  was  soon  to  pass 
over  into  opposition.  A  process  of  sifting  was  to  take  place,  and  the 
discoui'se  which  Christ  uttered  was  intended  to  bring  it  on. 

They  questioned  him  ;  but,  instead  of  replying,  he  entered  at  once 
upon  a  rebuke  of  their  carnal  temper  :  "  Ye  seek  me,  not  because  ye  saw 
the  miracles,  but  because  ye  did  eat  of  the  loaves,  and  tccre  filled.  Labour 
not  for  the  meat  lohich  jjcrishetli,  but  for  that  meat  which  endureth  unto 
everlasting  life,  which  the  Son  of  Man  shall  give  unto  you  ;  for  him  hath 
God  the  Father  sealed."  "  Ye  seek  me,  not  because  the  sign  of  my 
Divine  working,  which  ye  saw,  has  led  you  to  me  as  the  Son  of  God, 
■who  alone  can  supply  your  spiritual  wants ;  but  only  because  I  have 
appeased  your  bodily  appetite  ;  and  so  you  look  to  me  only  for  sensible 
gifts,  which  I  come  not  to  bestow  (^.  e.,  such  was  the  carnal  hue  of  their 
expectations  of  Messiah).  Strive  not  for  perishable,  but  eternal  food, 
imparting  eternal  life,  which  the  Son  of  Man  will  bestow;  God  has 
sealed  him  to  this  by  miracles  wi'ought  before  your  eyes,  in  attestation 
of  his  Divine  calling." 

*  Not  a  likely  thought,  if  Jesus  was  walking  on  t)ie  shore;  it  could  have  been  nothing 
strange,  especially  towards  Easter,  when  so  many  were  travelling  towards  Jerasalem,  to 
see  a  man  walking  on  the  lake-side  towards  morning. 

t  I  follow  John's  account,  as  most  naturally  explaining  itself. 

{  Part  of  what  occun-ed  w»uld  have  been  a  violation  of  the  Sabbath ;  in  later  times  there 
were  assemblies  in  the  synagogue  on  the  second  and  fifth  days  of  tlie  week  ( Whier,  Real- 
worterbuch,  2d  ed.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  637). 


266  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

Upon  this,  the  purer-minded  among  them  asked  him,  "  What  must 
we  do,  then,  to  become  worthy  of  the  Divine  favour'?"  They  expected 
him  to  prescribe  new  religious  duties  ;  but,  instead  of  this,  he  led  them 
back  to  the  one  work  :  '■'Believe  on  him  wlioin  God  hath  sent.'"  "Witli 
this  faith  every  thing  is  given. 

(2.)  A  greater  Sign  demamlecl. — The  Answer:  "  Christ  the  Breiid  of  Life."' 
Then  others*  came  out ;  either  eye-witnesses  of  the  miracle,  who 
(according  to  the  nature  of  the  unspiritual  mind),  still  unsatisfied,  and 
seeking  greater  signs,  were  liable,  from  their  want  of  faith,  to  be  soon 
Derplexed  even  in  regard  to  what  they  had  already  experienced  ;t  or 
persons  who  had  only  heard  of  the  miracle  from  others,  and  who  had 
decided  from  the  first  to  see  for  themselves  before  they  would  believe. 
These  demanded  of  Christ  (v.  30)  a  new  miraculous  attestation  ;|  and, 
as  the  Messiah  was  to  be  a  Moses  with  new  powers,  they  asked  that 
he  should  give  them  bread  from  heaven  —  celestial  manna — angels' 
food,  according  to  their  fancies  of  the  millennial  bliss. 

Christ  took  the  opportunity  (v.  32-42)  thus  naturally  offered  to 
lead  them  from  the  material  to  the  spiritual  and  Divine,  and  de- 
clared himself  to  be  the  true  bread  from  heaven,  at  the  same  time 
seeking  to  awaken  in  them  a  desire  for  it.  But  their  carnal  feel- 
ings were  susceptible  of  no  such  desire  ;  and,  still  regarding  only  the 
earthly  appearance,  they  took  offence  that  the  carpenter's  son  should 
say,  *'  I  came  doionfrom  heaven.'^  He  did  not  attempt  to  reason  them 
out  of  their  scruples,  but  laid  bare  the  source  of  them,  i.  e.,  their  dispo- 
sitions of  heart  and  mind  ;  of  these  they  had  first  to  be  rid,  before 
they  could  recognize  the  Divinity  in  his  human  manifestation  (v.  43- 
47).  "  Murtmtr  not  among  yourselves  ;  no  man  can  come  unto  me,  ex- 
cept the  Father,  ivhich  hath  sent  me,  draw  himS'  Seek  ivitldn  you,  not 
without  you,  for  the  cause  of  your  surprise  ;  it  lies  in  this  :  you  came 
to  me  carnally,  with  no  sense  of  spiritual  need  ;  and,  therefore,  have  not 
^he  drawing  of  the  Father,  which  all  must  follow  who  would  come 
unto  me  aright."  It  is  among  the  prophecies  that  are  to  be  fulfilled  in 
the  Messianic  age  that  ''•they  shall  all  he  taught  of  God ;''^  and  so, 

*  It  is  part  of  Jolui's  manner  not  to  distinguish  individuals  or  classes  closely  in  his  nar- 
rations. 

t  For  the  miracle  in  the  miracle,  the  Supernatural,  as  such,  can  only  be  apprehended  by 
the  Sense  for  the  Supernatural.  The  reaction  of  the  senses  on  the  critical  understandiuLr 
can  soon  uproot  a  conviction  growing  only  in  the  soil  of  the  senses.  One  reasons  awa}' 
what  ho  thinks  he  has  seen;  "it  could  not  have  happened  so." 

t  It  is  to  he  noted,  in  comparing  the  acaiunts  of  the  lico  instances  in  which  the  multitude 
were  miraculously  fed,  that  the  second  is  followed  (Matt.,  xvi ,  1)  by  a  demand  made  upon 
Christ  for  a  sign  from  heaven. 

§  .Tohn,  vi.,  4.5.  This  cannot  be  understood  of  the  subsequent  teaching  of  all  by  the  be- 
stowing of  the  Holy  Ghost,  or  of  the  general  teaching  of  Christianity ;  the  thing  in  view  in 
the  passage  was,  the  Divine  voice  in  men,  preceding  faith,  to  lead  them  to  Christ  as  Sav- 
iour, which  was  not  to  be  restrained  by  any  human  statutes. 


THE  SYNAGOGUE  AT  CAPERNAUM.  2C7 

every  one  that  follows  the  Father's  call,  comes  to  me.  (The  voice  ot 
God,  vifhich  testifies  of  the  Redeemer  in  all  needy  souls  and  calls  them, 
will  be  heard  every  where.)  But  this  must  not  be  understood  as  if  any 
one  could  know  the  Father,  or  be  united  with  him,  except  through  the 
Son ;  the  Son  alone,  derived  from  the  Father,  knows  him  perfectly, 
and  can  impart  this  knowledge  to  others  ["  Not  that  any  man  hath,  seen 
the.  Father,  save  he  which  is  of  God  ;  he  hath  seen  the  Father''''^  This 
])reventing  operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  was  only  intended  to  lead 
them  to  the  Son,  as  their  Redeemer  :  "  He  that  helieveth  on  me  hath. 
everlasting  lifeP  Again  (v.  48-51)  he  repeats  the  assertion,  "  I  am 
that  hread  of  life  from  heaven,'"  confirmed  by  the  proof  that  none  could 
attain  a  share  in  the  Divine  life,  or  communion  with  the  Father, 
except  through  him  ;  and  describes  himself  as  the  true  manna  from 
heaven. 

He  then  proceeds  to  tell  them  (v.  51)  that  he  wcfuld  give  them  a 
/)read  which  was  to  impart  life  to  the  world  ;  hence,  that  the  bread 
which  he  teas  about  to  give  was,  in  a  certain  sense,  different  from  the 
bread  which  he  was ;  different,  that  is,  from  his  whole  self-communi- 
cation. "  And  the  hread  ivhieh  I  will  give  is  viy  flesh.'"  This  bread 
was  to  be  the  self-sacrifice  of  his  bodily  life  for  the  salvation  of  man- 
kind.* The  life-giving  power,  as  such,  was  his  Divine-human  exist- 
ence ;  the  life-giving  power,  in  its  special  act,  was  his  self-sacrifice. 
The  two  are  inseparable ;  the  latter  being  the  essential  means  of  reali- 
zing the  former  ;  only  by  his  self-saci'ifice  could  his  Divine-human  life 
become  the  bread  of  life  for  men.t 

(3.)  Eating  Christ's  Flesli  and  drinking  his  Blood. — His  own  Exphmation  of  this. 
(John,  vi.,  53,  seq.) 

The  Jews  wilfully  perverted  these  words  of  Christ  (v.  52)  into  a 
carnal  meaning;  and  therefore  he  repeated  and  strengthened  them. 
"  Fxcept  ye  cat  the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  Man,'"'  &c.  (v.  53-58).  "  Ex- 
cept ye  receive  my  Divine-human  life  within  you,  make  it  as  your 
own  flesh  and  blood,  and  become  thoroughly  penetrated  by  the  Divine 
principle  of  life,  which  Christ  has  imparted  to  human  nature  and  him- 
self realized  in  it,  ye  cannot  partake  of  eternal  life." 

*  Lachmann's  text  omits  the  words  vv  fyw  liiatii  in  v.  51,  a  reading  which  is  supported  by 
considerable  authority.  Omitting  these  words,  only  the  general  idea  (the  aapl  to  be  de- 
voted for  the  salvation  of  men)  would  be  made  prominent  in  the  passage  ;  not,  however,  to 
the  exclusion  of  his  self-sacriiice  as  the  culminating-point  of  his  life  devoted  to  God  and  to 
man's  salvation.  But  the  omission  would  make  the  passage  harsh,  and  unlike  John's  style  ; 
the  words  may  have  slipped  out  of  some  of  the  MSS.,  from  their  similarity  to  the  j>recediug 

01'  f'yw  OaJffuJ. 

t  I  am  well  aware  of  what  Klinf^  says  against  LucJce  (Stud.  u.  Krit.,  1836,  1)  in  regard 
to  this  divisiiin  of  the  discourse,  but  my  views  remain  unaffected.  I  cannot  find  in  the 
words  of  Christ  the  Lutheran  Realism,  so  called. 


268  SECOND  GENERAL  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE. 

To  make  the  sense  of  his  figurative  expressions  perfectly  clear,  he 
changed  the  figure  again  to  the  "  bread  from  heaven  ;"  as  the  living 
Father  hath  sent  me,  and  I  live  by  the  Father ;  so  he  that  eateth  me* 
even  he  shall  live  by  me.}  This  is  the  bread  that  came  down  from  heav- 
en. But  most  of  his  disciples  still  lacked  the  capacity  to  understand 
how  his  words  mutually  explained  each  othei".  Adhering  to  the  out- 
ward and  material  sense,  they  seized  upon  those  expressions  which 
were  most  striking,  without  catching  their  connexion,  or  taking  the 
trouble  to  undei'Stand  his  figures  by  comparing  them  with  each  other 
and  with  the  unfigurative  expressions  ;  a  process  which  could  not  have 
been  difficult  even  to  those  among  them  who  were  incapable  of  pro- 
found thought,  accustomed  as  they  were  to  the  figurative  style  of  Ori- 
ental language,  and  to  Christ's  peculiar  manner  of  speaking.  Fasten- 
ing only  upon  the  expression,  "  eating  his  flesh  and  drinking  his  blood," 
in  this  sense,  they  found  it  "  a  hard  saying  which  they  could  not  bear" 
(v.  60). 

And  this  was  true  not  merely  of  the  mass  of  hearers  in  the  syna- 
gogue, but  also  of  many  who  had  become  his  followers  during  his 
protracted  labours  in  Galilee,  without,  however,  in  heart  and  spirit, 
really  belonging  to  the  circle  of  disciples.  The  foreign  elements  had 
to  be  separated  from  the  kindred  ones ;  and  the  very  same  impres- 
sions which  served  to  attach  really  kindred  souls  more  closely  to  the 
person  of  Christ  were  now  to  drive  off"  others,  who,  though  previously 
attracted,  were  not  decided  within  themselves  as  to  their  relations  to 
him  (v.  61-66). 

When  he  had  left  the  synagogue,  and  was  standing  among  persi^na 
who,  up  to  that  time,  had  been  his  Constant  attendants,  he  said,  in  view 
of  the  state  of  feeling  above  described,  "  I  have  spoken  to  you  of  eat- 
ing my  flesh;  doth  this  offend  you?  What,  then,  will  you  say,  when  the 
Son  of  Man  will  ascend  into  heaven  ?  You  will  then  see  me  no  more 
with  your  bodily  eyes  ;|  but  yet  it  will  be  necessary  for  you  to  eat 
my  flesh  and  drink  my  blood,  which  then,  in  a  carnal  sense,  will  be 
plainly  impossible."  It  is  obvious,  therefore,  that  Christ  meant  no 
material  participation  in  his  flesh  and  blood,  but  one  which  would 
have  its  fullest  import  and  extent  at  the  time  specified. 

He  then  naturally  passes  on  to  explain  the  spiritual  import  of  his 
life-streaming  words  :  "  It  is  the  Spirit  that  qiiickeneth,  the  flesh  profiteth 
nothing  ;  the  words  that  I sjjcak  unto  you,  they  are  sjnrit  and  tJiey  arc 

*  To  "  eat  him"  and  "  to  cat  liis  flesli  and  blood"  have  the  same  meaning. 

t  The  way  iu  whioh  Christ  himself  explains  his  meaning  by  changing  his  Wdrds  is 
(inough  to  show  how  far  removed  these  words  are  from  any  reference  to  a  communication 
of  the  body  of  Christ  in  the  Lord's  Supper. 

X  The  removal  of  Cinist's  bodily  presence  from  the  earth,  and  Ids  exaltati*  n  to  heaven, 
are  united  together  by  him.  Unbelievers  see  only  the  negative  side,  the  removal :  the  eye 
of  faitli,  in  seeing  the  one,  sees  the  other. 


THE  SYNAGOGUE  AT  CAPERNAUM.        2C9 

life.  It  is  the  Spirit  that  giveth  life  ;  the  flesh  is  nothing ;  hence  I  couhl 
not  have  meant  a  sensible  eating  of  my  flesh  and  blood,  but  the  appro- 
priation of  my  Spirit,  as  the  life-giving  principle,  as  this  communicates 
itself  through  my  manifestation  in  flesh  and  blood.  As  my  words  are 
only  the  medium  through  which  the  Spirit  of  life  that  gushes  forth  from 
me  is  imjjarted,  they  can  be  rightly  understood  only  so  far  as  the  Spirit 
is  perceived  in  them."  But  this  was  precisely  what  those  who  misun- 
dei'stood  him  were  deficient  in  ;  and,  "  therefore,^''  said  he,  "  I  said  unto 
you,  that  no  man  can  come  unto  me,,  except  it  were  given  unto  Mm  of  viij 
Father.  Only  those  that  hear  His  call,  and  come  with  a  susceptibility 
for  Divine  things,  can  apprehend  my  words  and  obtain  faith  in  me. 
As  I  said  unto  you,  your  carnal  sense  is  the  source  of  your  misunder- 
standing and  unbelief." 

(4.)  Sifthijj  of  the  Disciples. — Peter's  Confession. 

Then  followed  a  sifting  of  the  disciples.  \From  that  time  many  of 
his  disciples  loent  bach,  and  walhed  no  more  with  him?[  As  this  was  the 
natural  result  of  his  relations  to  thein,  he  rather  furthered  than  checked 
it ;  it  was  time  that  the  crisis  that  had  been  preparing  in  their  hearts 
should  manifest  itself  outwardly.  And  the  departure  of  the  unworthy 
was  to  test  the  genuine  disciples,  and  make  them  conscious  of  the  true 
relation  in  which  they  stood  to  Christ.  He  wished  them,  therefore,  in 
that  critical  moment,  to  prove  their  own  selves  ;  for  there  was  one 
among  them  already  upon  the  point  of  turning  away,  who  might  yet, 
by  heeding  Christ's  injunction,  have  saved  himself  from  the  destruction 
that  awaited  him. 

He  said  to  the  twelve,  "  Will  ye  also  go  aivay  V  Peter,  speaking, 
as  usual,  for  the  rest,  bore  testimony  to  their  experience  in  his  fellow- 
ship:  "■Lord,  to  whom  can  toe  goV  and  confirmed  Christ's  words  by 
his  own  consciousness,  in  whose  depths  he  had  felt  the  flow  of  their 
life-giving  fountain  :  "  Thou  hast  the  ivords  of  eternal  life.'"  And,  there- 
fore, he  was  able  to  confess  in  the  name  of  all  the  rest,  from  a  convic- 
tion founded  in  personal  knowledge  and  experience,  that  Jesus  was 
Messiah  (v.  69).  But  Christ  warned  them  that  there  was  one  among 
them  who  did  not  share  this  conviction,  although  included  in  Peter's 
confession.  He  had  chosen  them — drawn  them  to  himself— he  said, 
and  yet  one  of  them  had  the  heart  of  an  enemy.  These  words,  show- 
ing to  Judas  that  his  inmost  thoughts  lay  bare  before  Christ,  might, 
had  he  been  at  all  open  to  impression,  have  brought  him  to  repent  and 
open  his  heart  to  the  Saviour,  seeking  forgiveness.  Failing  this,  they 
could  only  strengthen  his  enmity. 


270  JOURNEY  TO  NORTH  GALILEE. 


CHAPTER  X. 

JESUS  IN  NORTH  GALILEE,  AND  ON  THE  WAY  TO  CESAREA  PHILIPl'L 
§  179.  Reasons  for  tlie  Journey. 
"E  have  said  that  Christ  desired  to  obtain  an  opportuuity  for 
private  intercourse  with  the  disciples,  in  order  to  hear  the  re- 
port of  their  mission  journey,  and  to  prepare  their  minds  for  the  stormy 
times  that  were  approaching.  As  it  seemed  impossible  to  secure  this 
in  the  neighbourhood  of  Tiberias,  he  determined  to  go  to  some  distance 
from  that  region  of  country,  a  purpose  which  other  circumstances  sonu 
hastened. 

Herod  Antipas,  who  then  reigned  in  Galilee,  hearing  of  the  fame  of 
Jesus,  became  personally  desirous  to  see  him.  This  wish  was  probably 
dictated  by  mere  curiosity,  or  by  a  desire  to  test  Christ's  power  to  work 
miracles;*  certainly  it  arose  from  no  sense  of  spiritual  need.  As  such 
a  meeting  could  lead  to  no  good  result,  Christ  must  have  desired 
to  avoid  it.  This  formed  an  additional  motive  for  withdrawing  him- 
self into  North  Galilee;  and  perhaps  beyond,  mio  Paneas,  or  Cesarca 
Philippi,  the  domain  of  the  Tetrarch  PhiHp.t  The  first  stage  of  the 
journey  took  him  to  Bethsaida  Julias,  on  the  west  side  of  the  Sea  of 
Genesareth. 

§  180.  Cure  of  the  Blind  Man  at  Bethsaida. — Peter^s  Second  Confes- 
sion.—  The  Pozver  of  the  Keys.  (Mark,  viii. ;  Matt.,  xvi.) 
At  Bethsaida  a  blind  man  was  brought  to  Christ,  who  took  him  out 
of  the  town  to  avoid  public  notice  ;  and  then  performed  on  him  the 
cure  whose  successive  steps  are  so  graphically  described  by  Mark. 
He  then  forbade  him  for  the  time  being  to  tell  of  what  had  been  done, 
as  notoriety  would  have  been  inconsistent  with  his  purpose  above  men- 
ti(>ne(+.| 

When  left  alone  with  the  disciples,  he  questioned  them  about  their 
travels,  and  concerning  the  opinions  generally  prevalent  in  regard  to 
himself.  Peter  renewed,  in  a  different  form,  the  confession  which  he 
had  before  made  on  a  similar  occasion. §     In  contrast  with  those  who 

"  Cf.  Luke,  xxiii.,  8.  In  view  of  the  character  of  Ilcrod,  there  is  more  interiinl  prnlia- 
bility  in  Luke,  ix.,  7,  than  Matt.,  xiv.,  1,  2. 

t  We  infer  the  direction  which  Christ  took  with  his  disciples  from  comparing  Matt.,  xv., 
21 ;  xvi.,  ]3 ;  Mark,  vii.,  24  ;  viii.,  27  ;  Luke,  ix.,  10-18. 

I  Tliis  suits  well  with  the  point  of  time  here  assigned  to  it. 

^  In  all  the  Gospels  this  event  is  closely  connected  with  the  miraculous  fcedinj:.  wliidi 
conlirms  our  view  of  the  historical  connexion  of  the  facts.    True,  it  is  possible  that  Peter  s 


THE  KEYS.  271 

saw  in  Jesus  only  a  Prophet,  he  said,  "  Thou  art  the  Messiah ;"  cer- 
tainly implying  more  than  was  included  in  the  ordinary  Jewish  sense ; 
although  he  must  have  fdt  more  than  he  could  unfold  in  definite 
thought  when  he  added,  ''•  llie.  Sou  of  the  living  God." 

Thus  had  Peter,  on  two  distinct  occasions,  given  utterance  to  the 
same  confession,  drawn  from  the  depths  of  his  inward  experience; 
in  the  first  instance,  in  opposition  to  those  whose  hearts  were  wholly 
estranged  from  Christ;  and  in  tlie  second,  to  those  who  had  obtained 
only  an  inferior  intuition  of  the  person  of  Christ.  The  Saviour,  there- 
fore, thought  him  worthy  of  the  following  high  praise  :  "  Blessed  art 
thou,  for  Jlesli  and  blood  hath  not  revealed  it  unto  thee,  hut  my  Father 
ivhich  is  in  heaven.'"'  Peter's  conviction ' was  the  result  of  no  human 
teaching,  no  sensible  impression  or  outward  authority ;  but  of  an  in- 
ward revelation  from  God,  whose  drawing  he  had  always  followed — 
a  Divine y^ic^,  which  comes  not  to  men  from  without ;  jvhich  no  educa- 
tion or  science,  how  lofty  soever,  can  either  make  or  stand  in  stead  of.* 

In  view  of  this  conviction  of  Peter,  thus  twice  confessed,  in  resard 
to  that  great  fact  and  truth  which  forms  the  unchangeable  and  immov- 
able basis  of  the  eternal  kingdom  of  God,  Christ  called  him  by  the 
name  which  at  an  early  period,  with  prophetic  glance,  he  had  applied 
to  him  (John,  i.,  42),  the  man  of  rock,  on  whom  he  declared  that  he 
would  build  his  Church,  that  should  triumph  over  all  the  powers  of 
deatb,t  and  stand  to  all  eternity. 

This  promise  was  not  made  to  Peter  as  a  person,  but  as  a  faithful  or- 
gan of  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  and  his  steadfast  witness.  Christ  might 
have  said  the  same  to  any  one,  who,  at  such  a  moment,  and  in  such  a 
sense,  had  made  the  same  confession ;  although  Peter's  uttering  it  in 
the  name  of  all  the  twelve  accorded  with  his  peculiar  ^dpiofia,  which 
conditioned  the  post  that  Christ  assigned  to  him. 

In  the  same  sense  he  confided  to  Peter  the  "keys  of  the  kingduni 
of  Heaven,"  which  was  to  be  revealed  and  spread  abroad  among  men 
by  the  cfunmunity  founded  by  him ;  inasmuch  as  men  were  to  gain 
admittance  into  that  kingdom  by  appropriating  the  truth  to  which  he 
had  first  testified,  and  which  he  was  afterward  to  proclaim.     This  was 

confession,  as  recoriled  by  Jolni,  is  the  same  as  that  recorded  by  Matthew,  and  nothing  es- 
sential would  be  lost  if  it  were  so.  But  we  may  certainly  suppose  that,  at  so  critical  a 
period,  Christ  could  have  questioned  his  disciples  thus  closely  on  two  different  occasions  in 
regard  to  their  personal  convictions,  which  were  soon  to  undergo  so  severe  a  trial. 

*  Cf.  p.  139. 

t  The  "Gales  of  Hades,"  in  Matt.,  xvi.,  18  (cf.  Isa..  xxxviii.,  10  ;  1  Cor.,  xv.,  55),  desig- 
nate rather  the  kingdom  of  death  than  of  Satan.  In  this  view  the  passage  means,  that 
"the  Church  should  stand  forever,  and  that  its  members,  partakers  of  the  Divine  life, 
should  fear  death  no  more — of  course  implyuig,  however,  that  she  should  be  victorious 
over  all  hostile  powers. 


272  JOURNEY  TO  NORTH  GALILEE. 

to  be  the  key  by  which  the  kingdom  was  to  be  opened  to  all  men 
And  with  it  was  entrusted  to  him  the  power,  on  earth,  "to  bind  and 
loose"  for  heaven  ;  since  he  was  called  to  announce  forgiveness  of  sin? 
to  all  who  should  rightly  receive  the  Gospel  he  was  to  proclaim,  and 
the  announcement  of  pardon  to  such  as  received  the  offered  grace  had 
necessarily  to  be  accompanied  by  the  condemnation  of  those  who  re- 
jected it.* 

^181.    The  Disciples  prohibited  to  reveal  Christ'' s  Messianic  Dignity. — 

The  Weakness  of  Peter  rebuked.     (Matt.,  xvi.,  20-28 ;   Mark,  viii., 

30.) 

Thus  Christ  confirmed  the  Apostles  in  their  confession  of  his  Mes- 
sianic dignity.  But  he  knew,  at  the  same  time,  that  their  minds  were 
still  tinctured  wilh  the  ordinary  ideas  and  expectations  of  a  visible 
kingdom  to  be  founded  by  Messiah  ;  and  he,  therefore,  gradually  taught 
them  that  it  was  by  his  own  sufferings  that  the  kingdom  of  God  was  lo 
be  established.  [^Then  charged  he  his  disciples  that  they  should  tell  no 
man  that  he  was  Jesus  the  Christ,  From  that  time  he  began  to  show  to 
his  disciples  hoio  that  he  must  go  to  Jerusalem  and  suffer  many  things,  Sfc] 

The  prohibition  was  doubtless  given  with  a  view  to  prevent  them 
from  diffusing  the  expectations  of  Messiah  which  they  tJien  entertained, 
and  thus  leading  the  people  to  political  undertakings,  and  the  like,  in 
opposition  to  the  objects  of  Christ.  The  words  that  immediately  fol- 
low the  prohibition  confirm  this  view  of  it.  But  Christ's  declarations 
that  sufferings  lay  before  him  was  too  far  opposed  to  the  disciples'  opin- 
ions and  wishes  to  find  easy  entrance  to  their  minds.  "  Be  it  far  from 
thee,  hord,^^  said  Peter  ;  an  exclamation  inspired,  indeed,  by  love,  but 
a  love  attaching  itself  rather  to  the  earthly  manifestation  of  Christ's 
person,  than  to  its  higher  one  ;  a  love  in  which  natural  and  human  feel- 
ings were  not  as  yet  made  sufficiently  subordinate  to  God  and  his  king- 
dom. And  as  the  Saviour  had  just  before  exalted  Peter  so  highly, 
when  he  testified  to  that  which  had  not  been  revealed  to  him  by  flesli 
and  bloo^d,  but  by  the  Father  in  heaven  ;  so  now  he  reproved  him  as 
severely  for  an  utterance  inspired  by  a  love  too  much  debased  by  flesh 
and  blood.  Human  considerations  were  more  to  him  than  the  cause 
of  God  ;  he  sought,  by  presenting  them,  as  far  as  in  him  lay,  to  \)ve- 

*  This  view  of  the  "  binding  and  loosing"  power  is  sustained  by  Joiin,  xx.,  23.  Tlic  sani,- 
thing  is  expressed  in  other  words  in  Matt.,  x.,  13  ;  2  Cor.,  ii.,  15,  16.  The  difTcrence  ho- 
twccn  the  figure  of  "the  Iteys"  and  that  of  "  binding  and  loosing"  need  cause  no  difficulty; 
tliey  refer  to  dilFerent  conceptions ;  the  former,  to  reception  into,  and  exclusion  from,  the 
kingdom  of  Heaven ;  the  latter,  to  the  means  of  receptiou  and  exclusion,  viz.,  the  pardon 
of  sin  and  the  withholding  of  pardon. 


THE  WISDOM  OF  SERPENTS.  073 

vent  Christ  from  offering  the  sacrifice  which  his  Divine  callincr  Je- 
manded  ;*  and  his  disposition  was  rebuked  with  holy  indignation.! 

Christ  then  turned  to  his  disciples,  and  gave  them  a  lesson  directly 
opposed  to  Peter's  weak  unwillingness  to  sacrifice  every  thing  to  the 
nne  holy  interest.  He  impressed  upon  them  a  truth  pre-eminently  ne- 
cessary to  the  fulfilment  of  their  calling,  viz.,  that  none  but  those  who 
were  prepared  for  every  species  of  self-denial|  could  become  his  dis- 
ciples, and  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God,  whose  foundations  he  was 
about  to  lay.  Finally,  he  announced  to  them  that  many  among  them 
would  live  to  see  the  kingdom  of  Gtod  come  foith  in  glorious  victory 
over  all  its  foes.  It  is  true,  they  .were  not  at  that  time  able  fully  to 
comprehend  this ;  only  at  a  later  period,  by  the  illumination  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  by  the  course  of  events,  the  best  commentary  on  proph- 
ecy, were  they  to  be  brought  completely  to  understand  it. 

§  182.  Monitio77S  of  Christ  to  the  Aj)Ostles  in  regard  to  Prudence  iu 
their  Ministry. — (1.)  The  Wisdom  of  Serpents  and  Harmlessness  of 
Doves.  (Matt.,  X.,  16.) — (2.)  The  Parable  of  the  Unjust  Steward. 
(Luke,  xvi.,  1-13.) — (3.)  "  Make  to  yourselves  friends  of  the  Mam- 
mon of  Unrighteousness,^'  &c. 

To  this  period,  in  which  Christ  conversed  with  his  disciples  in  re- 
gard to  their  first  missionary  tour,  and  gave  them  cautions  for  their  fu- 
ture and  more  difficult  labours,  doubtless  belong  many  advices  of  the 
same  tenor,  found  in  different  places  in  the  Gospels.  We,  therefore, 
join  together  several  sayings  of  this  kind  here ;  if  not  chronologically, 
at  least  according  to  the  substantial  connexion. 

As  he  sent  the  disciples  forth  like  defenceless  sheep  among  wolves, 
he  bade  them,  in  the  struggles  through  which  they  must  pass,  to  com- 
bine childlike  innocence  and  purity  of  heart,  symbolized  by  the  harm- 
less dove,  with  prudence  and  sagacity,  whose  symbol  was  the  serpent.§ 

*  The  alternations  in  Peter's  feelings,  and  his  consequent  desert  of  praise  or  blame  from 
tlie  Master,  within  so  short  a  time,  are  so  easily  explained  from  the  stand-point  yhich  he 
then  occupied,  that  I  cannot  find  any  thing  strange  in  Christ's  expressing  himself  thus  op- 
positely to  him,  as  Schleiermacher  does  (Werke,  ii.,  107).  And,  therefore,  I  see  no  internal 
ground  for  believing  that  the  passage  is  not  properly  connected  with  the  narrative  here. 

t  This  helps  to  fix  the  right  point  of  view  for  understanding  Christ's  previous  declara- 
tion and  promise  to  Peter;  and  the  two  addresses  to  him,  taken  together,  attest  the  fidelity 
of  the  narrative  as  unconniptcd  by  a  later  ecclesiastical  interest. 

t  It  was  naturally  necessary  for  Christ  to  impress  this  truth  frequently  upon  the  disci- 
ples ;  Matt.,  xvi.,  24  ;  Mark,  viii.,  34,  35;  Luke  ix.,  23,  24  ;  and,  therefore,  the  occurrence 
of  similar  passages,  e.  g.,  Matt.,  x.,  38  ;  John,  xii.,  2.5,  26,  proves  nothing  against  the  ori- 
ginality of  the  discourses  there  recorded ;  although  it  is  possible  that  his  sayings  to  this 
effect  on  one  occasion  may  have  been  combined  with  those  uttered  on  another  to  the  same 
tenor. 

§  Paul,  who  frequently  alludes  to  Christ's  sayings,  does  so  several  times  to  this  one, 
Rom.,  xvi.,  19 ;  1  Cor.,  xiv.,  20.  I  place  the  passage  in  this  comiexion  as  better  adapted 
to  it  than  to  the  fii'st  Apostolical  missionary  jouniey. 

s 


274  JOURNEY  TO  NORTH  GALILEE. 

They  were,  indeed,  to  labour  as  organs  of  the  Divine  Spirit,  and  to  be 
furnished  with  Divine  powers  for  their  ministry ;  but  he  did  not  wish 
them,  on  that  account,  to  neglect  all  proper  human  means  for  over- 
coming the  difficulties  they  should  meet  with,  but  rather  to  apply  that 
wisdom  which  knows  how  to  use  circumstances  prudently.  No  such 
rule  would  have  been  given  had  he  expected  his  kingdom  soon  to  be 
established  by  a  sudden  interference  of  Omnipotence ;  it  was  prescribed 
in  view  of  a  gradual  developement  by  the  use  of  means  provided  in  the 
general  course  of  nature. 

Yet  the  attempt  to  exercise  prudence  for  the  kingdom  of  God  might 
(he  taught)  easily  beguile  them  from  purity  and  simplicity  of  heart. 
Tlie  wisdom  of  the  serpent  was,  therefore,  limited  by  the  innocence  of 
the  dove  ;  their  prudence  was  to  be  defined  by  purity.  They  were  to 
use  none  but  pure  and  truthful  means  for  the  advancement  of  the  holy 
objects  of  the  kingdom.  On  the  other  hand,  the  combination  of  wis- 
dom  with  innocence  showed  that  the  childlike  simplicity  of  discipleship 
was  perfectly  consistent  with  the  culture  and  use  of  the  understanding, 
and  with  a  judicious  share  in  the  manifold  and  diversified  relations  of 
life ;  the  one  thing  needful  was,  that  furihj  should  inspire  tlieir  wis- 
dom. Here,  as  always,  Christ  brings  into  their  higher  unity  things 
which  elsewhere  oppose  and  contradict  each  other. 

(2-) 
The  parable  of  the  Unjust  Steward  illustrates  this  combination  of 
simplicity  with  prudence*  We  find  the  main  point  of  comparison  not, 
as  some  do,  in  the  proper  management  of  earthly  possessions,  but  in 
the  words  emphasized  by  Christ  himself:  "  The  children  of  this  world 
are  rviser  in  their  generation  than  the  children  of  light"  (v.  8).  The 
children  of  the  world,  using  more  wisdom  than  the  children  of  light, 
often  succeed  in  carrying  out  their  purposes  against  the  latter ;  as,  on 
the  other  hand,  the  children  of  light  fail  of  ends  connected  with  the 
Divine  kingdom,  because  they  lack  wisdom  in  the  choice  of  the  means. 
That  wisdom,  therefore,  which  characterizes  the  children  of  the  world 
is  to  be  recommended  to  the  children  of  light.  This  is  the  main  thought ; 
the  proper  use  of  earthly  goods,  subordinating  every  thing  to  the  king- 
dom of  God,  is  a  minor  one.  Keeping  this  in  view,  the  difficulties  of 
the  parable  vanish;  the  special  feature  in  it  which  forms  a  stumbling- 
block  to  some  will  be  found  precisely  adapted  to  tliis  thought,  and 
necessary  to  its  illustration. 

The  example  of  the  unjust  steward  is  to  be  imitated,  not  in  regard  to 

•  It  is  to  be  noted  that  this  parable,  according  to  Luke,  xvi.,  1,  was  addressed  to  the 
disciples,  even  thongh  we  apply  the  word  to  the  larger  circle  of  disciples,  and  not  siiecificaUy 
to  the  Apostles.  We  need  not  suppose,  from  v.  14,  that  it  was  directed  against  the  avarice 
of  the  Pharisees. 


THE  UNJUST  STEWARD.  275 

the  disposition  that  impelled  him,  but  to  his  undivided  attention  to 
every  thing  which  could  serve  as  a  means  to  his  ends.  As  the  children 
of  the  world  aim  steadily  at  their  selfish  objects,  and,  with  ever-watch- 
ful prudence,  seize  upon  all  the  means  necessary  to  secure  them,  so  the 
children  of  light  are  to  keep  constantly  before  their  eyes  the  relations 
of  life  to  the  Divine  kingdom,  and  to  press  every  thing  into  their  ser- 
vice in  its  behalf.  It  is,  indeed,  a  difficult  task  to  combine  the  single- 
ness of  aim  and  simplicity  of  heart  which  the  Gospel  requires  with 
that  shrewd  sagacity  which  can  bend  all  earthly  things  to  its  holy  pui"- 
poses.  Yet  if  the  aim  to  serve  God's  kingdom  be  the  ruling  power 
of  one's  life,  and  all  the  manifold  interests  6f  life  are  made  subordinate 
thereto  ;  if  the  holy  decision  be  once  made  and  never  swerved  from,  it 
will  bring  forth,  as  one  of  its  necessary  fruits,  this  true  sagacity  and 
moral  presence  of  mind.  It  is  precisely  this  connexion  of  prudence 
with  a  single,  steadfast  aim,  though  a  bad  one,  that  is  illustrated  in  the 
conduct  of  the  unjust  steward.  A  bad  man  was  necessarily  chosen 
for  the  example;  its  very  object  was  to  show  how  much  the  children 
of  light  might  do  for  the  kingdom  of  God,  if  they  would,  in  this  respect, 
imitate  the  children  of  the  world. 

(3.) 

The  sul)ordinate  point  of  the  parable  is  the  special  application  of  this 
prudence  to  the  use  of  earthly  goods.  We  must  take  care,  in  inter- 
preting the  verses  which  follow,  not  to  lose  sight  of  the  parable  itself. 
As  the  unjust  steward  secures  the  favour  of  the  debtors  by  gratuities, 
in  order  to  make  sure  of  a  home  for  himself  when  his  office  is  taken 
away.;  so  the  children  of  light,  by  the  right  use  of  earthly  possessions, 
are  to  make  for  themselves  friends  who  will  receive  them  into  everlast- 
ing mansions  when  they  are  called  away  from  this  life. 

It  is  plain  that  charities  to  the  pious  are  meant  here,  as  none  can 
"  receive  into  evei-lasting  habitations"  unless  they  themselves  dwell 
there.  But  it  would  be  inconsistent  with  Christ's  general  teaching  to 
suppose  that  he  meant  to  say  that  pious  souls  in  heaven  would  have  the 
power  to  receive  those  who  hud  done  kindness  to  them  on  earth  into  a 
share  of  their  blessedness;  or  that, the  merely  outward  act  of  alms- 
giving to  the  pious  could  atone  for  past  sins  and  secure  eternal  joy. 
The  persons  addressed  are  presupposed  as  alrcad.y  "  children  of  light;" 
and  they  are  required  to  manifest  their  inward  feelings  in  outward  acts. 
The  active  love  of  Christians  is  to  show  itself  such,  in  the  use  of  earthly 
goods,  by  sharing  them  with  fellow-Christians.  "  Fit  yourselves,  bv 
your  labours  of  love,  to  become  fellow-inmates  of  the  heavenly  man- 
sions with  those  whose  wants  you  have  willingly  alleviated  during 
their  earthly  wayfaring."  The  form  of  expression  is  adapted  to  the 
parable ;  iJiere  the  debtors  of  the  rich  man  were  made  friends  by  the 


276  JOURNEY  TO  NORTH  GALILEE. 

unjust  steward  to  secure  a  home  on  earth ;  lierc  the  pious  poor  are 
made  friends  by  the  Christian  to  secure  an  eternal  mansion  in  heaven. 

Christ  annexes  to  this  application  of  the  parable  certain  directions 
for  the  use  of  property  by  the  children  of  God.  He  designates  worldly 
goods  fiauncdvag  -ii^  ddiKia^,  adiKoq  iiamioivag ;  because  they  are  usually 
unjustly  obtained,  and  employed  in  the  service  of  the  devil,  who  is, 
and  will  be,  the  ruler  of  this  world  (and  thus  called  KOGiiOKpdru)p)  until 
the  cotisummation  of  the  kingdom  of  G  od.  And  this  evil  mammon  is 
contrasted  with  the  true  riches,  which  cannot  be  possessed  except  by 
the  children  of  light.*  The  wealth  of  this  world  belongs  to  the  children 
of  this  world,  who  devote  it  to  the  service  of  Evil ;  it  is  another  man's, 
and  not  the  Christian's  o\\  n ;  while  he  dwells  in  a  world  of  strangers, 
7ie  knows  of  higher  riches,  of  which  the  worldling  is  totally  ignorant.f 

The  summary,  then,  of  precepts  annexed  to  the  parable  by  Christ, 
and  illustrating  its  import,  is  as  follows  (v.  10-13):  "Be  faithful  in 
manao-ing  your  earthly  property,  that  you  may  be  found  worthy  to  be 
intrusted  with  the  higher  riches.  '  He  that  is  faithful  in  the  least,  is 
faithful  also  in  much;'  the  fidelity  which  is  proved  by  the  i-ight  use  of 
wealth  may  be  trusted  with  the  riches  of  the  kingdom.  The  latter  will 
be  gi-anted  in  proportion  to  the  former.  '  But  he  that  is  unjust  in  the 
least,  will  be  unjust  also  in  much.'  Who  will  trust  you  with  the  true 
riches,  if  you  misapply  the  unrighteous  mammon  ?  *  And  if  ye  have 
not  been  faithful  in  that  which  is  another's,  who  shall  give  you  that 
which  is  your  own  V  Who  will  give  you  that  which  properly  belongs 
to  your  higher  nature,  if  you  mismanaged  what  was  not  your  own,  but 
only  intrusted  to  you  V 

The  concluding  thought  is  :  "  No  servant  can  serve  two  masters  at 
once,  the  sei-vant,  in  the  strictest  sense,  being  wholly  dependent  upon 
the  master,  and,  in  fact,  his  instrument;  so  no  man  can  have  two  mas- 

*  The  antithesis  of  ahKov  and  dX;j6urfi',  in  v.  11,  mi^^ht  lead  us  to  interpret  the  first  as 
"what  is,  in  itself,  not  good;"  but  the  phrase  naiiitwms  -f/s  uSiKtai,  and  the  implied  allusion 
to  the  parable,  favour  the  sense  given  in  the  text. 

t  Here  is  illustrated  the  difference  betvreen  the  Ebionitish  idea  of  worldly  goods  and  the 
true  Christian  view.  According  to  the  first,  Satan  is  Lord  and  Master  of  this  world  in  u 
physical  sense  ;  and  the  possession  of  property,  beyond  the  bare  necessaries,  is  considered 
as  sinful  in  itself,  as  sharing  in  a  domain  which  ought  to  be  left  exclusively  to  the  servants 
of  Satan.  According  to  the  latter,  earthly  goods  are  not  the  true  riches,  which  the  Christian 
alone  can  possess,  and  shall  possess  forever,  in  greater  and  greater  fulness ;  they  belong 
to  Satan  in  the  same  sense  as  the  whole  world  belongs  to  him.  But  as  the  world,  from  a 
kingdom  of  Satan,  is  to  become  the  kingdom  of  God,  so  worldly  goods  are  to  be  employed 
by  the  children  of  light  to  advance  the  latter,  with  a  wisdom  (illustrated  in  the  parable)  not 
to  be  sur]:)assed  by  the  wLsdom  of  the  world.  It  is  to  be  remarked  that  Christ,  instead  of 
presenting  the  principle  in  its  abstract  generality,  applied  it  spccijicalli/  to  acts  of  benevo- 
lence ;  the  disciples,  at  that  period,  had  no  opportunity  of  employing  their  property  to 
further  the  other  objects  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  such  as  liave  been  abundantly  furnished  in 
the  later  course  of  its  developcment.    Cf.  De  Wette,  Matt.,  xix.,  21. 


THE  UNJUST  STEWARD.  277 

ters  spiritually ;  the  one  only  who  rules  the  whole  life  is  ilie  master." 
No  man's  life  can  depend,  at  the  same  time,  upon  both  God  and  Mam- 
mon. To  find  one's  true  good  in  Mammon,  and  to  serve  God  as  Mas- 
ter, these  things  are  incompatible.  The  true  child  of  God  applies  his 
earthly  wealth  to  His  ser\-ice,  and  therein  proves  himself  a  faithful  ser- 
vant ;  regarding  it  not  as  a  good  in  itself^  but  only  in  its  bearing  upon 
the  kingdom  of  God — the  highest  good. 

It  is  clear  that  this  passage  (placed  out  of  its  connexion  in  Matt.,  vi., 
24)' stands  properly  here,  closely  joined  to  the  parable;  and,  indeed, 
requisite  to  set  the  idea  of  the  parable  in  its  proper  light.  The  prin- 
cipal scope  of  the  latter,  as  we  have  seen,  is  to  show  the  connexion 
between  loisdom  and  a  steadfast  aim  of  life ;  and  the  passage  in  ques- 
tion (v.  13)  contains  precisely  the  same  thought;  as  it  teaches  that  we 
cannot  rightly  use  our  earthly  goods  unless  we  make  our  choice  deci- 
dedly between  God  and  the  world,  and  then,  with  undivided  aim,  refer 
all  things  to  the  one  Master  to  whom  we  have  consecrated  our  whole 
life. 

Thus  the  parable  illustrates  the  precept,  "Be  tcise  as  serpents,  and 
harmless  as  doves T  It  exhibits  the  unjust  steward  as  a  model  of  ser- 
pent wisdom,  which,  imitated  by  Christians,  becomes  the  wisdom  of 
innocence.  The  concluding  words  of  Christ,  above  explained  (v.  13), 
teach  that  the  true  simplicity,  i.  e.,  singleness  of  aim,  generates  that 
controlling  presence  of  mind  which  is  the  element  of  wisdom.  What, 
at  a  later  period,  was  the  chief  source  of  Paul's  Apostolical  wisdom 
but  this,  that  his  heart  was  ?iot  divided  between  God  and  the  world ; 
that  he  had  but  one  aim,  and  served  but  one  Master  1 

^  183.  Caution  against  iinprudent  Zeal  in  Preaching  the  Gospel. 
Akin  to  the  wisdom  thus  recommended  to  the  Apostles  is  the  rule 
of  preaching  the  truth  given  in  Matt.,  vii.,^,  Give  not  that  which  is  holy 
unto  the  dogs,  neither  cast  ye  your  pearls  liefore  swine,  lest  they  trample 
them  under  their  feet,  and  turn  again  and  rend  you.  "Valuable  as  pearls 
are  to  men,  they  would  only  enrage  hungi'y  swine,  who  would  trample 
them,  and  rush  upon  him  that  had  so  deceived  their  hunger."  Under 
this  vivid  illustration,  Christ  enjoined  his  disciples  to  guard  against 
hastily  offering  the  sacred  truths  of  the  kingdom  to  minds  carnally  unfit 
for  them,  and  destitute  of  a  sense  of  spiritual  need;  the  holy  pearls 
would  be  valueless  in  the  eyes  of  such.  To  meet  them  on  their  own 
ground,  and  yet  offer  them  nothing  to  satisfy  their  carnal  desires,  would 
only  rouse  their  evil  passions,  and  expose  valuable  lives,  which  ought  to 
be  preserved  for  the  kingdom  of  God,  without  doing  any  good.  The 
witness  for  the  truth  must  needs  be  zealous  and  courageous,  but  he 
need  not  be  imprudent  or  indiscreet. 


278  JOURNEY  TO  NORTH  GALILEE. 

The  Apostles,  then,  were  cautioned  against  the  error  into  which  some 
later  missionaries  have  fallen,  of  offering  the  Gospel,  under  the  impulse 
of  inconsiderate  zeal,  without  regard  to  the  proprieties  of  time  and  place. 
Still,  it  by  no  means  followed  that  they  were  not  to  preach  under  cir- 
cumstances in  which  the  Word  might  prove  a  stone  of  offence  to  some, 
while  it  pricked  others  to  the  heart ;  the  Word  was  destined,  of  neces- 
sity, to  sift  the  various  classes  of  men  that  should  hear  it.  Nor  was  the 
caution  neglected  by  Christ  himself,  when  he  refused  to  allow  the  rage 
of  carnal  and  narrow-minded  hearers  to  hinder  him  from  uttering  ^lis 
truths  boldly,  and  without  regard  to  consequences,  revealing  a  spiritual 
power  that  defied  all  opposition  ;  or  when  he  punished  their  obduracy 
by  ceasing  to  condescend  to  their  weakness  and  prejudice,  and  by  offer- 
ing the  truth  in  its  sharp  and  naked  outlines,  even  although  it  excited 
the  wrath  of  some,  while  it  led  others  to  reflection. 

The  apophthegm  that  we  have  just  considered  was  in  itself  a  judg- 
ment and  a  prediction.  The  more  immediate  application  of  such  say- 
ings depended  upon  the  circumstances  under  which  they  were  uttered  ; 
to  interpret  them,  it  is  not  sufficient  to  have  their  letter  only,  but  also 
the  life-giving  Spirit  which  originally  inspired  them. 

An  ancient  and  wide-spread  tradition  ascribes  to  Christ  the  following 
saying:  "yiveode  rpaTre^Tai  doKi^oi :  hecome  approved  money-cliangersr 
This  expression  bears  the  stamp  of  Christ's  figurative  manner  of  speech  ; 
and  the  external  and  internal  evidence  is  in  favour  of  its  genuineness.* 
If  this  expression  be  deemed  akin  to  the  parable  of  the  Talents,  its  sense 
could  be  given  thus  :  "5e  like  acute  mone ij-cJi angers ;  adding  daily  to 
the  capital  intrusted  to  you."  But  the  principal  figure  in  the  parable 
of  the  talents  is  not  the  money-changer,  but  the  person  who  puts  money 
at  interest  with  him  ;  and,  besides,  the  money-changers  did  not  gain 
money  with  borrowed  capital,  but  with  their  own.  We  must,  therefore, 
look  for  an  interpretation  mq^-e  in  accordance  with  the  business  of  the 
broker.  Ecclesiastical  antiquity,  which  perhaps  first  received  thest; 
words  of  Christ  in  connexion  with  others  that  explained  them,  aflbrds 
us  such  an  interpretation.  It  was  part  of  the  business  of  the  money- 
changer to  distinguish  genuine  from  counterfeit  coin.  So  Christ  miglit 
have  given  this  rule,  capable  of  manifold  application  in  the  labours  of 
the  Apostles ;  to  imply  a  careful  circumspection  in  order  to  distinguish 
the  true  from  the  apparent,  the  genuine  from  the  counterfeit,  the  pure 

*See  Fahricii,  Cod.  Apocryph.  N.  T.,  i.,  330;  iii.,  524.  Wo  find  tliis  saying  in  aptH- 
ryphal  writin2;s,  both  heretical  and  Catholic ;  and  many  imitations  of  it  seem  to  have  been 
made  by  the  ecclesiastical  teachers  of  the  first  century,  which  could  not  have  happened  at 
that  time  had  it  not  been  uttered  by  Christ  or  one  of  the  Apostles.  Paul  (whoso  writings 
contained  many  allusions  to  Christ's  words,  and  sentiments  taking  their  hue  from  them) 
perhaps  had  this  saying  in  mind  in  I  Thess.,  v.,  21,  as  has  been  supposed  by  Huiisel,  with 
whose  view  of  the  apophthegm  I  agree. — (Stud.  u.  Krit.,  183C,  1.) 


THE  SYRO-PHCENICIAN  WOMAN.  279 

from  the  alloyed ;  not  to  condemn  hastily,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  not 
to  trust  lightly. 

§  1S4.  The  Syro-Phoenician  Woman.  (Matt.,  xv.,  21  ;  Mark,  vii.,  24.) 
—(1.)  Her  Prayer.— {2.)  Her  Repulse.— {3.)  Her  FaUJi.—{\.)  The 
IZesult. 

(1.) 
Christ,  having  passed  beyond  the  northern  border  of  Galilee,  reached 
a  place  where  he  wished  to  remain  unknown.  But^the  fame  of  his 
miracles  had  preceded  his  arrival.  A  heathen  woman  of  the  neigh- 
bourhood (a  Canaanite  or  Phoenician),  whose  daughter  was  a  demoniac, 
hastened  to  seek  help  from  the  Saviour.  As  he  went  out  with  the  dis- 
ciples, she  ran  and  cried  to  him,  "  Have  mercy  on  me,  O  Lord  !  thou 
Sf))i  of  David  ;  my  daughter  is  grievously  vexed  with  a  devil." 

(2.) 

"  But  he  answered  and  said,  I  am  not  sent  but  unto  the  lost  sheep  of 
the  house  of  Israel.  .  .  .  It  is  not  meet  to  take  the  children's  bread  and 
to  cast  it  to  dogs."  Taking  this  reply  alone,  apart  from  the  circum- 
stances under  which  Christ  uttered  it,  it  appears  mysterious,  indeed, 
that  he  should  so  emphatically  restrict  his  mission  to  the  Jews,  that  he 
should  speak  of  the  heathen  in  such  a  tone  of  contempt,  and  repel  the 
prayer  of  the  woman  with  so  much  severity.  But  although  we  may 
not  be  able,  from  the  close  and  abridged  narrative,  to  obtain  a  clear  view 
of  the  matter,  we  can  yet  remove  its  difficulties  to  a  great  extent  by 
considering  it  in  its  proper  historical  connexion.* 

We  have  before  said  that  the  restriction  of  Christ's  mission  to  the 
lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel  was  not  inconsistent  with  his  purpose 
of  establishing  a  universal  kingdom.  This  restriction  referred  to  his 
jiersonal  agency,  which  in  fact  belonged  to  the  Jewish  people ;  not, 
however  (as  he  himself  said),  but  that  he  had  "  other  sheep  not  belong- 
inor  to  this  fold,"  whicli  were  at  some  time  to  be  brought  into  the  same 
fold,  and  under  the  same  shepherd,  with  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of 
Israel.  But  in  other  cases,  also  (as  we  have  seen),  he  afforded  Yds  per- 
sonal assistance  to  individual  heathens.  We  must,  therefore,  seek  the 
reasons  of  Christ's  conduct  in  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  the  case, 
and  of  the  time  at  which  it  occurred. 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  clear  that  he  wished,  at  that  juncture,  to  re- 
main hidden,  and  therefore  to  avoid  public  labours  (Mark,  vii.,  24).     In 

"  The  attempt  to  remove  these  difficulties  by  the  theory  that  Christ  altered  his  plan  at 
different  periods  camiot  be  made  to  harmonize  with  the  attendant  circumstances  of  this 
case,  as  related  by  Mark  as  well  as  Matthew  ;  for  these  circumstances  (the  journey  into 
North  Galilee,  &c.)  prove  that  this  case  must  be  placed  chronologically  after  other  cases  in 
which  Christ  had  assisted  individual  heathens. 


'280  JOURNEY  TO  NORTH  GALILEE. 

rlie  previous  cases  in  which  he  had  assisted  individual  pagans,  no  fur- 
rher  consequences  were  likely  to  follow  ;  but  his  agency  in  this  case 
was  likely  to  draw  multitudes  around  him,  and  to  extend  his  ministry 
among  the  heathen,  in  opposition  to  his  general  plan.  His  action, 
therefore,  was  directed  only  to  the  Apostles  and  to  the  woman  ;  the 
latter  he  wished  to  relieve  after  she  had  proved  her  faith  and  poured  out 
her  whole  heart  before  him  ;  to  the  former  the  case  afforded  an  example 
of  pagan  faith  that  might  shame  the  Jews,  and  teach  the  Apostles  that 
the  heathen  would  yet  believe  in  him,  and  share,  through  their  faith,  in 
tlie  blessings  of  his  kingdom.  It  may  be  a  question  whether  this  was 
Chiist's  intention  from  the  beginning,  or  whether  the  woman's  fervent 
prayer  and  believing  importunity  overcame  his  first  purpose  to  send 
her  away.  There  is  nothing  in  the  latter  supposition  inconsistent  with 
the  character  of  Jesus,  since,  in  his  purely  human  being,  he  was  dif- 
ferently determined  by  different  circumstances.  . 

And  again,  hard  as  the  words  "  one  ought  not  to  cast  the  children'' s 
bread  to  the  dogs"  may  sound  to  us,  we  must  remember  that  it  was  a 
figurative  expression,  meaning  nothing  more  than  that  the  mercies  des- 
tined for  the  Theocratic  people  could  not  as  yet  be  extended  to  a  peo- 
ple at  that  time  far  from  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  by  no  means  ex- 
cluding the  expectation  that  this  relation  should  be  so  changed  as  that 
all  should  become  "  children," 

(3.) 

The  woman  doubtless  felt  that  these  words,  severe  as  they  were, 
came  from  a  heart  overflowing  with  love,  and  she  continued  her  prayer 
with  trustful  importunity,  herself  entering  into  the  words  of  Christ  and 
acknf)\vledging  their  truth.  "  Yes,  Lord  ;  yet  the  dogs  eat  of  the  crumbs- 
which  fall  from  their  master's  table" 

Now  if  this  total  abasement  before  a  man  of  another  nation  be  re 
garded  merely  as  an  outward  and  human  submission  for  the  sake  of  a 
bodily  blessing,  it  must  a^jp^ear  abject  indeed;  nor  could  Christ  have 
praised  it  and  granted  the  favour  so  earnestly  yet  basely  sought.  But 
it  was  not  of  such  a  character ;  the  pagan  woman  felt  herself  unworthy 
of  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  therefore  was  not  degraded  by  her  sense 
of  inferiority  to  the  Theocratic  nation  ;  she  humbled  herself,  not  before 
a  man,  but  before  one  in  whom  (whatever  conception  she  had  of  his 
person)  God  revealed  himself  to  her  heart ;  it  was  to  a  Divine  powei% 
not  a  human,  that  she  gave  so  lowly  a  submission.  It  is  precisely  this 
sense  of  unworthiness  and  unconditional  submission  to  God,  when  re- 
vealed in  his  omnipotence  and  mercy  ;  it  is  precisely  Faith,  in  tliis  pe- 
culiarly Christian  sense,  which  is  made,  throughout  the  New  Testa- 
ment, the  condition  of  all  manifestations  of  the  grace  of  God.  Tlio 
act  of  Christ  in  tlie  case  illustrated  his  own  saying,  "  He  that  huvibleth 


THE  TIIANSFIGURATION.  281 

Idmself  sJiall  he  exalted;''^  he  answered  the  woman,  commending  her 
as  he  would  not  commend  the  Jews,  "  O  woman,  great  is  thy  faith  ;  he 
it  unto  thee  even  as  thou  wilt.'''  He  set  up  the  believing  woman  as  a 
pattern  of  that  faith  which  was  to  become,  among  the  pagans,  the 
ibundation  of  the  kingdom  of  God. 

Thus,  again  and  again,  under  the  most  varied  circumstances,  did 
Christ  set  forth  the  value  in  which  he  held  a  Spirit  of  humble,  self- 
denying  devotion  to  God  and  submission  to  his  revelation  in  Christ ; 
this  spirit,  so  irreconcilably  opposed  to  the  pride  of  natural  Reason 
which,  in  the  ancient  world,  was  held  to  be  man's  highest  dignity,  was 
made  by  Christ  the  essential  condition  of  participation  in  his  kingdom. 
Idle,  indeed,  and  vain,  therefore,  must  be  all  attempts-  to  make  Chris- 
tianity, in  this  sense,  a  religion  of  reason,  or  to  make  Christian  ethics 
a  morality  of  reason. 

The  transaction  affords  another  lesson,  also.  The  Christian  may 
comfort  himself  under  the  hardest  trials  and  severest  struggles — nay, 
even  when  his  most  ardent  prayers  appear  to  be  unheard  and  un- 
answered— with  the  consoling  belief  that  behind  the  veil  of  harshness 
the  Father's  love  conceals  itself: 

[Behind  the  frowning  Providence 
He  hides  a  smiling  face.] 

§  185.   The  Transfiguration  of  Christ.     (Luke,  ix.,  29-36.) 
Six  days*  after  the  conversation  in  which  Christ  first  unfolded  to  the 
Apostles  the  sufferings  and  the  fate  that  awaited  him,  he  took  Peter, 
James,  and  John  up  into  a  mountain  apart,  and  was  transfigured  before 
them. 

The  Transfiguration  may  be  considered  either  (1)  as  an  objective 
fact,  a  real  communication  with  the  world  of  spirits ;  or  (2)  as  a  sub- 
jective psychological  phenomenon.  The  account  of  Luke  bears  in- 
dubitable marks  of  originality  and  historical  truth  ;  the  attempts  that 
have  been  made  to  resolve  it  into  a  mythical  narrative  are  absurd. 
But  it  certainly  appears  to  favour  the  second  view  above  stated  rather 
than  the  first. 

If  we  adopt  the  first  view,  and  assume  that  the  narrative  is  intended 
to  relate  an  objective  fact,  it  affords  us  a  partial  exhibition  of  the  inter- 
course of  Christ  himself  with  the  world  of  spirits.  It  could  not  have 
been   intended  mei'ely  for  the  Apostles  to  witness ;    for,  during  its 

*  Luke  says  eight  days;  Matthew  six  ;  involving  no  discrepancy,  however,  for  it  is  easy 
t<i  show  that  they  employed  different  modes  of  computation.  Statements  of  time  thus 
agreeing  in  fact,  but  differing  in  fonu,  are  among  the  surest  signs  of  veracity  in  historical 
narratives. 


282  JOURNEY  TO  NORTH  GALILEE. 

progress,  lliey  were  "  heavy  with  sleep,''''  and,  therefore,  unfit  to  appre- 
hend it,  or  to  transmit  an  account  of  it  as  matter  of  fact.  We  cannot, 
however,  deny  the  possibility  of  such  an  occurrence,  and  of  some  un- 
known object  for  it,  in  the  connexion  of  a  history  which  is  entirely  out 
of  the  ordinary  course  of  events.  Once  admitting  the  event  as  such, 
all  that  we  should  have  to  do  would  be  to  confess  our  ignorance, 
instead  of  losing  ourselves  in  arbitrary  hypotheses  and  speculative 
dreams.  * 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  by  following  the  indications  given  in  Luke, 
we  may  arri^ve  at  the  following  view  of  the  narrative  :  Jesus  retired  in 
the  evening  with  three  of  his  dearest  disciples,  apart,  into  a  mountain,* 
to  pray  in  their  presence.  We  may  readily  imagine  that  his  prayei 
referred  to  the  subjects  on  which  he  had  spoken  so  largely  with  the 
disciples  on  the  preceding  days,  viz.,  the  coming  developement  of  his 
kino-dom,  and  the  conflicts  he  was  to  enter  into  at  Jerusalem  in  its 
behalf  They  were  deeply  impressed  by  his  prayer;  his  countenance 
beamed  with  radiance,  and  he  appeared  to  them  glorified  and  trans- 
figured with  celestial  light.  At  last,  worn  out  with  fatigue,  they  fell 
asleep ;  and  the  impressions  of  the  Saviour's  prayer  and  of  their  con- 
versation with  him  were  reflected  in  a  visiont  thus  :  Beside  Him,  who 
was  the  end  of  the  Law  and  the  Prophets,  appeai'ed  Moses  and  Elitis 
in  celestial  splendour  ;  for  the  glory  that  streamed  forth  from  Him  was 
reflected  back  upon  the  Law,  and  the  Prophets  foretold  the  fate  thai 
awaited  him  at  Jerusalem.  In  the  mean  time  they  awoke,  and,  in  a 
half-waking  condition,^  saw  and  heard  what  followed.  Viewed  in  this 
light,  the  most  striking  feature  of  the  event  is  the  deep  impression 
which  Christ's  words  had  made  upon  them,  and  the  conflict  between 
the  new  views  thus  received  and  their  old  ideas,  showing  itself  thus 
while  they  were  in  a  state  of  unconsciousness. 

Still  the  difficulty  remains,  that  the  phenomena,  if  simply  psycho- 
logical, should  have  appeared  to  all  the  three  Apostles  precisely  in  the 
same  form.  It  is,  perhaps,  not  improbable,  that  the  account  came 
from  the  lips  of  Peter,  who  is  the  prominent  figure  in  the  narrative.§ 

*  We  do  uot  know  whether  this  was  Mount  Hennon,  or  the  mountain  from  whicli 
Cesarea  Philipjii  took  the  name  Paneax.  The  old  tradition,  wiiich  makes  Mount  Tahui 
the  site  of  ttie  transfiguration,  cannot  be  relied  on. 

t  Cf.  Matt.,  xvii.,  9.  X  Cf.  Luke,  ix.,  33,  last  clause. 

§  We  have  several  times  remarked  that  too  much  importance  is  not  to  be  attached  to  the 
omission  of  any  event  by  John  that  is  reconled  by  the  other  Evan2;elists.  Still  his  silence  in 
regard  to  the  transfiguration  is  remarkable,  seeing  that  he  himself  was  an  eye-witness,  and 
that  the  event  itself,  if  an  objective  reality,  was  calculated  to  display  the  grandeur  of 
Christ  in  a  very  high  degree.  Two  reasons  may  be  suj)posod  for  this  :  (1.)  That  he  did  not 
deem  himself  prepared,  from  the  circumstances  of  the  event,  to  give  a  distinct  representa- 
tion of  it;  or,  (0.)  That  be  did  not  view  it  as  an  objective  reality,  and,  therefore,  did  not  at 
tach  so  much  importance  to  it.  Dr.  Sckneckenhurger  (Beitragen  zur  Einleitung  in  das  Neue 
Testament)  thinks  that  .John  omitted  the  transfiguration  because  of  the  Gnostics  and  Do- 
cetics,  who  might  have  used  it  to  support  their  views  of  the  person  of  Christ ;  but  to  us  it 


CURE  OF  A  DEMONIAC.  283 

The  disciples  did  not,  at  first,  dwell  upon  this  phenomenon.  The 
turn  of  Christ's  conversations  with  them,  and  the  pressure  of  events, 
withdrew  their  attention  from  it  until  after  the  resuiTection,  when,  as 
the  several  traits  of  their  later  hitercourse  with  Christ  were  brought  to 
mind,  this  transfiguration  was  vividly  recalled,  and  assigned  to  its  prop- 
er connexion  in  the  epoch  which  preceded  and  prepared  the  way  for 
the  sufterings  of  the  Saviour.* 

§  186.  Elias  a  Forerunner  of  Messiah.     (Matt.,  xvii.,  10-13.) 
The  relations  of  Elias  to  Christ  at  that  time  greatly  occupied  the 
minds  of  the  disciples,  as  is  obvious  from  the  portions  of  one  of  their 
conversations  with  him  that  are  preserved  to  us.t 

As  we  have  seen  [Matt.,  xvi.,  21],  he  was  at  this  period  unfolding  to 
his  disciples  his  approaching  appearance  at  Jerusalem  as  Messiah,  and 
his  impending  fate.  They  presented  to  him  in  connexion  with  this,  as 
a  difficulty  in  their  minds,  the  prediction  taught  by  the  scribes,  and  the 
very  one  which  they  arrayed  against  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus — that 
Elias  must  first  appear,  to  introduce  the  Messiah  among  the  Theocrat- 
ic people.  He  answered  that  the  scribes  were  right  in  saying  that 
Elias  must  first  come  and  make  smooth  the  way  for  the  coming  of  Mes- 
siah ;  but  that  they  were  wrong  in  the  carnal  and  literal  sense  which 
they  put  upon  the  saying,  as  if  Elias  were  to  appear  in  person.  Elias, 
he  told  them,  was  spiritually  represented  by  John  the  Baptist ;  he  "  is 
come  already,  and  they  knew  him  not,  but  have  done  unto  him  ivhatsoevcr 
they  listed.\  Likewise,  also,  shall  the  Son  of  Man  suffer  of  them!" 
The  same  selfish  spirit,  the  same  adherence  to  the  letter,  which  hindered 
them  from  seeing  Elias  in  John,  and  induced  them  to  get  rid  of  so 
troublesome  a  witness,  would  prevent  them  from  recognizing  Messiah 
in  the  Son  of  Man,  and  lead  them  to  treat  him  as  they  had  done  the 
Baptist. 

§  187.   Christ   Cures  a  Demoniacal  Youth  after  the  Disciples  had  at- 
tempted  it  in  vain.     (Mark,  ix.,  14  ;  Matt.,  xvii.,  14  ;   Luke,  ix.,  37.) 
— He  Reproves  the  unbelieving  Multitude. 
On  descending  from  the  mountain  with   Peter,  James   and  John, 

Christ  found  the  rest  of  the  disciples  surrounded  by  a  multitude  of  per 

appears  that  this  would  have  been,  on  the  contrary,  a  reason  why  he  should  mention  it,  to 
guard,  by  a  full  and  clear  statement,  against  misiutei-pretation  on  that  side. 

*  Luke,  ix.,  36,  is  most  simple  :  they  kept  it  close,  and  told  no  tnan  in  those  days  any  of 
those  things  which  they  had  seen.  The  statement  in  Matthew  and  Mark,  that  Clirist  for- 
bade it,  gives  a  reason  for  this  silence,  in  accordance  more  with  the  view  that  the  event 
was  purely  objective. 

t  We  think  we  are  justified  in  considering  Matt.,  xvii.,  10-13,  as  one  of  these  ;  the  oZv 
with  which  the  question  commences  shows  that  it  has  a  connexion  elsewhere. 

t  These  words  prove  that  Christ  attributed  John's  fate  to  the  machinations  of  the  Phari- 
sees. 


284  JOURNEY  TO  NORTH  GALILEE. 

sons,  some  well,  and  others  ill  disposed.  A  man  in  great  distress  on 
account  of  a  deeply-afflicted  son*  had  gone  thither,  attracted  by  the 
fame  of  Christ's  agency  in  healing  similar  cases.  The  youth  appears 
to  have  been  subject  to  epileptic  fits,  with  a  state  of  imbecility  or  mel- 
ancholy, in  which  last  condition  he  was  incapable  of  utterance.  He 
frequently  attempted  to  kill  himself  during  these  attacks,  by  throwing 
himself  into  the  fire  or  into  the  water.  The  unhappy  father  had  first 
met  the  disciples  who  remained  at  the  foot  of  the  mountain,  and  these 
last  attempted  to  make  use,  in  this  case,  of  the  powers  of  healing  con- 
veyed to  them  by  Christ.  But  the  result  satisfied  them  that  they  were 
yet  far  from  being  able  to  act  as  organs  for  his  Divine  powers.  They 
could  not  cure  the  demoniac ;  and  some  unfriendly  scribes  who  were 
present  took  advantage  of  the  failure,  and  of  the  excitement  which  it 
caused  among  the  people,  to  question  the  disciples ;  probably  disputing 
the  miracles  and.  the  calling  of  their  Master.t 

In  the  mean  time,  Christ  suddenly  appeared  amid  the  throng,  to  their 
great  surprise. |  Part  of  the  multitude  were  full  of  hope  that  He  would 
do  what  his  disciples  had  failed  to  accomplish ;  others,  doubtless,  as 
anxiously  hoped  that  his  efforts  would  be  as  impotent  as  theirs.  In 
this,  as  in  other  cases,  the  Saviour  combined  earnest  reproof  with  con- 
descending love.  He  reproved  them  because  his  long  labours  had, 
not  yet  satisfied  them ;  because  they  still  felt  no  higher  than  corporeal 
wants  ;  because  their  unbelief  still  demanded  sensible  miracles.  "  O 
faithless  generation  !  Jiow  long  shall  I  he  with  you  and  suffer  your\ 

The  demoniac  was  brought  in;  and,  as  usual  in  such  cases,  the  Di- 
vme  manifestation  appears  to  have  produced  a  crisis,  attraction  and  re- 
pulsion. His  convulsions  came  on  with  new  power.  To  prepare  the 
mind  of  the  father,  Christ  listened  patiently  to  his  history  of  the  dis- 
ease, which  he  closed,  as  if  oppressed  by  the  sight  of  his  suflering  son, 
with  the  prayer,  "  ^ut  if  thou  canst  do  any  thing,  have  compassion  on  us 
and  help  us.'''  Fervent  as  the  prayer  was,  the  words,  "  If  thou  canst 
do  any  thing,"  implying  a  distant  doubt,  led  Christ  to  reprove  him  gently, 

*  Nothing  could  be  a  stronger  proof  of  historical  voracity  than  the  three  separate  hut 
agreeing  accounts  of  this  event,  all  from  difterent  sources.  Mark's  naiTative  is  obviously 
due  to  an  eye-witness ;  it  is  marked  by  simplicity  and  naturalness,  without  a  trace  of  the 
exaggeration  which  Sbriuss  would  see  in  it. 

t  The  presence  of  the  scribes  would  fix  the  site  rather  at  some  mountain  of  Galilee  than 
at  Mount  Hernion  or  Paneas. 

i  iieOii)i(iii(hi,  Mark,  ix.,  15,  appears  entirely  natural ;  any  thing  but  e.ias^gn-crtcd,  as  Strausx 
will  have  it. 

§  It  by  no  means  follows  tliat  Christ's  exclamation  refers  to  the  disciples:  much  niore 
probably  to  all  tliat  ha<l  preceded  ;  the  spirit  in  which  his  aid  iiad  been  sought,  and  his 
miraculous  power  doubted.  The  word  ycvui  is  too  general  for  the  Apostles  ;  nor  would  the 
Lord,  who  generally  bore  with  their  weaknesses  so  benignantly,  have  so  severely  re- 
proved them  in  tliis  case.     Nor  would  they,  in  that  case,  have  put  the  iiuestion  in  ver.  -Jb. 


PRAYER  AND  FASTING.  285 

and  encourage  liim  to  believe,  not  by  saying,  "  Douht  not ;  /  can  do 
all  tilings''  but  by  pointing  out  to  him  the  defect  witMn  himself: 
"  Can  I  do  any  thing  %  Know  that  if  thou  canst  believe,  all  things  arc 
possible  to  him  that  believeth"  (thou  thyself  canst  do  all  things,  if  thou 
only  believest;  faith  can  do  all).*  The  gentle  reproof  had  its  full  ef- 
fect ;  the  father,  full  of  feeling,  cried  out  in  tears,  "  Yes,  Lord,  I  be- 
lieve (yet  I  feel  as  yet  that  I  do  not  believe  sufficiently) ;  help  thou  my 
unbelief."  Christ  then  spoke  in  tones  of  confident  command  ;  and  the 
demoniac  suffered  a  new  and  intense  paroxysm,  which  exhausted  all 
his  strength.  He  lay  like  a  corpse ;  "  but  Jesus  took  him  by  the  hand 
and  lifted  him  up,  and  lie  arose." 

§  188.  Christ  tells  the  Disciples  the  Came  of  their  Failure. —  The  Poiver 
of  Faith.— Prayer  and  Fasting.  (Matt.,  xvii.,  20,  21.) 
After  this  experience,  so  important  in  view  of  the  coming  independ- 
ent labours  of  the  disciples,  they  asked  of  Christ,  "  WAy  could  not  we 
cast  him  out  ?"  and  thus  gave  him  occasion  to  point  out  to  them  a  two- 
fold ground  in  their  own  selves,  viz. :  (1)  a  want  of  perfectly  confiding 
faith,  and  (2)  a  want  of  that  complete  devotion  to  God  and  renun- 
ciation of  the  world  which  is  imphed  in  prayer  xmi\  fasting.  The  for- 
mer presupposes  the  latter,  and  the  latter  reacts  upon  the  former. 
"  Because  of  your  unbelief  ;\  for  verily  I  say  unto  you.  If  ye  have  faith 
as  a  grain  of  mustard  seed,\  ye  shall  say  unto  this  mnuniain.  Remove 
Jience  to  yonder  place,  and  it  shall  remove^  and  nothing  shall  be  impossi- 
ble unto  you.''\\  And  then  he  adds  (probably  after  some  intermediate 
sentences  not  reported  in  this  brief  but  substantial  account)  :  "  Such  a 
power  of  the  Evil  Spirit  as  is  in  this  form  of  demoniacal  disease  can 
only  be  overcome  by  prayer  and  fasting.''      That  is,  by  that  ardent 

*  I  give  a  free  translation  of  that  very  difScult  passage,  Mark,  is.,  23  ;  snch  as  the  con 
iiexion  appears  to  me  to  demand.  Ei  ivvacai,  in  v.  23,  I  think,  refers  to  the  words  spoken 
by  the  man,  v.  22  :  t6  =  "  that,"  which  had  been  said  :  iticTtvaai  is  wanting  in  Cod.  Vatican., 
according:  to  Bentley's  collation,  and  in  Cod.  Ephrctem.  Rescript,  (see  Tischendorfs  re- 
print) ;  and  I  think  it  is  a  gloss.     Knatchbull  considers  it  as  middle,  but  without  ground. 

t  /.  c,  want  of  lively  confidence  in  the  promises  they  had  received  of  Divine  Power, 
through  Christ,  to  work  miracles,  and  in  their  Divine  calling  and  communion  with  God 
through  Christ ;  in  general,  a  want  of  religious  coiwiction  and  confidence,  as  practically 
displayed  in  subduing  all  doubts  and  difficulties  ;  e.  g.,  such  as  Paul's. 

X  The  same  figure  as  in  the  parables  of  the  kingdom  of  Gon,  probably  intended  to  illus- 
trate the  growth  of  faith,  once  rooted  in  the  heart,  by  the  power  of  God  that  dwells  in  it : 
like  the  growth  of  the  mighty  tree  from  the  diminutive  seedconi. 

6  In  Oriental  manner,  Christ  takes  a  concrete  figure  from  the  visible  creation  before  him, 
to  set  forth  the  general  thought :  "  You  will  be  able  to  remove  all  difficulties  ;  apparent  im- 
possibilities will  become  possible." 

11  The  right  limitation  of  this  (not  to  extend  it  to  an  indefinite  generality)  lies  in  its  ref- 
erence, in  the  context,  to  men  irorking  as  arp;ans  of  the  Spirit  of  God ;  it  excludes,  there- 
fore, all  self-will,  refusing  to  submit  to  the  Divine  order,  which  is,  indeed,  antagonistic  to  faith 
itself. 


286  JOURNEY  TO  NORTH  GALILEE. 

prayer*  which  is  offered  in  humiliation  before  God,  and  abstraction  from 
the  world,  in  still  collectedness  of  soul,  undisturbed  by  corporeal  feel- 
ings. Doubtless,  by  this  whole  statement,  Christ  intended  to  satisfy 
the  disciples  that  they  were  not  spiritually  prepared  fully  to  discharge 
the  duties  of  their  ministry.t 

§  189.  Return  to  Capernaum. — Dispute  among  the  Disciples  for  Pre- 
cedence.—  The  Child  a  Pattern. — Acting  in  the  Na7ne  of  Christ. 
(Luke,  ix.,  46  ;  Mark,  ix.,  33  ;  Matt.,  xviii.) 

We  have  seen  that  on  a  certain  occasion|  Christ  replied  to  those 
who  asked  "why  his  disciples  did  not  fast,"  &c.,  that  "the  time  had 
not  yet  come."  But  a  new  epoch  was  now  approaching;  and  he  him- 
self gave  his  disciples  another  rule,  and  taught  them  what  they  lacked 
to  fit  them,  by  further  abstraction  from  the  world  and  earnest  collected- 
ness of  heart,  for  their  high  calling. 

Although  Christ  had  directly  discountenanced,  in  his  conversations 
after  the  return  of  the  Apostles  from  their  trial  mission,  the  serisiious 
expectations  which  they  entertained  from  his  Messiahship,  still  the  ideas 
on  which  their  hopes  were  founded  were  too  deeply  rooted  in  their 
hearts  and  minds  to  be  readily  eradicated.  With  these  was  connected, 
[)a.rtly  as  cause  and  partly  as  effect,  the  self-seeking  which  tinged  their 
relations  to  the  kingdom  of  God.     This  same  feehng  was  manifest  in 

The  Jews  and  early  Christians,  in  times  of  special  prayer,  retired  from  social  intercourse 
and  bodily  enjoyments,  restraining  the  bodily  appetites  ;  and  the  mention  of  prayer  and 
fiistijig-  together  implies  this  state  of  entire  collectedness  and  devotion. 

t  There  are  some  discrepancies  in  the  Evangelists  as  to  the  collocation  of  the  passages 
here  refeiTed  to.  The  two  verses  in  Matt,  (xvii.,  20,  21)  harmonize  well  with  each  other 
and  with  the  connexion.  But  in  Mark,  xi,  23,  the  sajing  of  Christ  in  regard  to  the  poiver 
cf faith  is  given  in  a  connexion  not  homogeneous  to  it,  especially  the  witiicriug  of  the  fig- 
tree,  which  was  not  adapted  to  illustrate  the  positive  efficiency  of  faith.  In  Luke,  xvii.,  6, 
a  different  figui'e  is  used,  viz..  the  uprooting  of  a  sycamore;  and  this  passage  was  probably 
uttered  in  a  diflereut  locality;  as  it  is  most  likely  that  the  Saviour,  in  view  of  his  approach- 
ing separation  from  the  disciples,  took  many  occasions,  and  employed  various  figures,  to 
encourage  and  strengthen  their  believing  confidence. 

A  more  striking  difference  is,  that  in  Mark's  account  of  Christ's  reply  to  the  question  of 
the  disciples  (ix.,  28,  29)  the  Jirst  sentence  (the  power  of  faith)  is  left  out,  and  the  second 
only  (prayer  and  fasting)  given.  As  this  last  is  given  by  both  Matthew  and  Mark,  it  is  more 
certain  that  it  was  spoken  in  that  connexion.  But  then,  again,  Mark,  i.x.,  23.  contains  a  state- 
ment of  the  power  of  faith,  addressed,  not  to  the  disciples,  but  to  the  father  of  the  demoniac  ; 
in  so  natural  a  connexion,  too,  that  it  would  be  impossible  to  deny  the  aptness  of  the  collo- 
cation ;  but  in  Matlhcw  this  is  entirely  wanting.  This  last  omission,  and  the  mistaken 
interpretation  put  ujion  yeva'i  HitinToi  (Matt.,  xvii.,  17),  may  have  given  occasion  for  referring 
iiii  Tiiv  umoTiav  (v.  20)  to  that  phrase  in  V.  17,  and  for  here  transferring  the  passage  on 
the  power  of  faith  to  this  place  from  some  other.  Yet  it  is  also  possible  tiiat  Christ  ut- 
tered both  expressions  (viz.,  Mark,  ix.,  23,  and  Matt.,  xvii.,  20),  and  that  their  similarity  of 
thought  induced  each  writer  to  retain  bat  one.  In  confirmation  of  this,  Luke  do(>8  not 
mention  (xvii.,  .5,  6)  the  historical  connexion  in  which  the  thought  was  uttered  ;  the  disci- 
ples would  not  have  asked,  "Lord,  increase  our  faith,"  but  for  an  exiieriencc  of  their  want 
of  it;  and  precisely  such  an  experience  is  given  in  the  accounts  of  Matthew  and  Mark. 

»  Cf.  p.  203. 


THE  CHILD  A  MODEL.  287 

their  conversation  on  the  way  back  to  Capernaum  from  tneir  northern 
torn*;  they  disputed  among  themselves  on  the  journey  about  their  rel- 
ative activity  in  the  service  of  their  Master,  and  who  among  them 
should  hold  the  first  place  in  the  kingdom  of  God.* 

After  their  arrival  at  Capernaum,  Christ  asked  them  the  subject  on 
which  they  had  disputed  by  the  way,  intending  that  the  very  shame  of 
answering  his  question  might  make  them  conscious  how  unworthy  of  dis- 
ciples such  a  dispute  had  been.  This  end  being  answered,  he  did  not 
directly  reprove  them  further  ;  but  in  a  few  words,  made  impressive 
by  a  vivid  illustration,  he  set  before  them  the  worthlessness  of  their  con- 
tention, and  its  utter  antagonism  to  the  spirit  which  must  rule  in  the  king- 
dom of  God.  Taking  a  little  child,  he  placed  him  in  their  midst,  and 
said,  "  Let  this  child,  in  its  unassuming  ingenuousness,  be  your  model ; 
he  among  you  that  is  most  child-like  and  unassuming,  that  thinks  least 
of  himself  and  his  own  worth,  he  shall  be  greatest  (shall  be  of  most  im- 
portance to  the  kingdom  of  God)."t  Then,  embracing  the  child,  he 
added,  "  "Whosoever  shall  receive  one  such  little  child  in  my  name, 
receiveth  me ;  and  whosoever  receiveth  me,  receiveth  him  that  sent 
me."| 

The  truth  herein  expressed,  though  different  from  the  other,  is  yet 
akin  to  it ;  and  both  rebuke  the  strife  for  precedence,  the  disposition  to 
dwell  upon  one's  own  merits,  and  set  a  false  value  upon  actions  as 
great  or  small.  It  is  not  merely  what  a  man  does  that  makes  his  action 
worthy,  but  the  spirit  in  which  he  does  it.  The  deed  in  itself  may  be 
great  or  small ;  its  worth  depends  upon  its  being  done  in  the  name 

*  This  is  not  to  be  confounded  with  a  later  dispute  of  the  same  character;  in  the  in- 
stance before  us  the  question  referred  to  the  prcsenl,  not  to  the  future,  who  is  the  greatest 
in  his  personal  qualities  and  performances?  Christ's  I'eply  was  directed  to  this  question  ; 
not,  as  in  the  subsequent  case  (Luke,  xxii.,  24,  &c.),  to  one  concerning  precedence  in  the  Mes- 
sianic kingdom.  Matthew's  accoaut,  therefore  (xviii.,  i.),  seems  to  be  less  original  than 
those  of  Luke,  ix.,  46 ;  Mark,  ix.,  33.  The  former  is  less  homogeneous ;  and,  besides,  in  it 
the  disciples  propose  the  question  ;  in  the  others  Christ  anticipates  them  ;  which  seems  the 
more  likely,  as  they  might  readily  feel  that  their  dispute  was  foreign  to  Christ's  spirit,  and, 
therefore,  be  ashamed  to  put  the  question.  It  is  also  easier  to  explain  the  origin  of  Mat- 
thew's statement  from  this,  as  the  original  form,  than  that  of  the  latter  from  the  former.  It 
must  always  be  a  debatable  question,  so  far  as  Luke,  ix.,  4G,  is  concerned,  whether  the 
disciples  only  thought  this,  or  expressed  their  thoughts  to  each  other. 

t  Luke's  report  of  the  sayings  of  Christ  upon  this  occasion,  although  more  simple  and  ho- 
mogeneous than  those  of  Matthew  and  Mark,  does  not  seem  to  retain  the  order  of  the  two 
expressions  so  well.  This  is  evident,  both  from  the  yup  in  the  last  clause  of  v.  48,  and 
from  John's  question  in  v.  49,  which  was  evidently  occasioned  by  the  words  immediately 
before  spoken  by  Christ,  but  not  by  those  in  the  last  clause  referred  to. 

t  In  Matt.,  X.,  42,  we  find  another  saying  to  the  same  effect  as  that  which  has  been  placed 
here  in  its  connexion.  "Even  a  drink  of  water  given  to  the  most  insignificant  person  as  a 
disciple  of  Christ,  and  in  his  name,  will  not  lose  its  reward."  It  is  the  disposition  to  act 
in  Christ's  name  which  gives  value  to  the  most  unimportant  act.  The  form  in  which  the 
disposition  shall  reveal  itself  is  conditioned  by  circumstances  which  are  not  under  the  con- 
trol  of  man;  but  the  disposition  itself,  which  is  stamped  as  Christian  from  its  reference  t) 
the  name  of  Christ,  is  independently  rooted  in  the  heart. 


288  JOURNEY  TO  NORTH  GALILEE. 

of  Christ  and  for  his  sake.  And  this  spirit  is  pleasing  to  God,  for 
our  actions  can  only  be  referred  to  Him  by  means  of  our  relation  to 
Christ. 

The  principle  thus  announced  by  Christ  struck  at  the  root  of  the  con- 
tention among  the  disciples.  Their  false  emulation  could  have  no  place, 
if  their  actions,  whether  great  or  small,  were  alike  in  value,  if  alike 
done  in  the  name  of  Christ ;  and  to  magnify  themselves,  or  their  claims, 
would  have  been  absurd  in  view  of  such  a  rule  of  action. 

§  190.  Christ's  two  Sayings  :  "  He  tliat  is  not  against  you  is  for  you,'" 
and,  "  He  that  is  not  for  me  is  against  me.""     (Mark,  ix.,  40.) 

It  is  hardly  probable  that  the  disciples  at  once  understood  the  pro- 
found meaning  of  Christ's  words  on  the  occasion  referred  to  in  the  pre- 
ceding section ;  and  thus  it  was  that  John  (Mai'k,  ix.,  38)  brought  for- 
ward an  instance  which  appeared  to  him  inconsistent  with  the  rule  just 
laid  down.* 

It  appears  that  the  miracles  of  Christ,  and  those  wrought  by  the 
Apostles  by  calling  upon  his  name,  had  induced  others,  not  belonging 
to  the  immediate  circle  of  the  disciples,  to  call  upon  the  name  of  Jesus 
for  the  healing  of  demoniacs.t  The  disciples,  displeased  that  one  out 
of  their  circle,  and  unauthorized  by  Christ,  should  try  in  this  way  to 
make  himself  equal  with  them,  had  forbidden  him  to  do  so.  Even  here, 
selfish  motives  appear  to. have  intruded;  only  those  who  belonged  to 
them  were  to  be  allowed  to  make  use  of  Christ's  name.  In  view  of 
what  Chiist  now  said,  however,  of  the  value  of  even  the  smallest  actions, 
if  done  in  His  name,  John  seems  to  have  thought  within  himself:  "If 
every  thing  that  is  done  in  His  name  be  so  worthy,  have  we  not  done 
wrong  in  forbidding  him  who  was  thus  working  in  his  name  V 

It  is  true  Christ's  words  referred  to  the  disposition  of  the  heart,  and 
a  mere  external  calling  upon  his  name  would  not  necessarily  involve 
all  that  he  meant.  And  had  the  disciples  fully  understood  his  mean- 
ing, they  would  probably  not  have  alluded  to  such  an  instance.  But 
the  instance  itself  may  have  been  allied  to  that  which  has  the  aim  of 
Christ's  words ;  a  man  who  thought  so  highly  of  Christ's  name  as  to 
believe  that  by  using  it  he  could  do  such  great  works,  even  though  he 
enjoyed  no  intimate  relations  with  the  Saviour,  might  have  been  on 
the  way  to  higher  attainments,  and,  by  obtaining  higher  knowledge 
and  a  purer  faith,  might  have  reached  the  stand-point  designated  by 
Christ ;  and  so  his  outward  calling  upon  the  namb  might  have  led  the 

*  Strauss  objects  to  Schleiermacker's  view  (wliicli  accords  in  substance  with  mine),  that 
"  it  presuppose!?  a  readiness  of  thought  in  the  disciples  of  which  they  were  by  no  means 
possessed."  It  is  just  the  reverse  ;  it  seems  to  have  been  precisely  the  want  of  clear  ap- 
prehension at  the  time  which  led  John,  without  further  thought  upon  the  sense  and  bear- 
ing of  Christ's  remarks,  to  seize  upon  the  words,  "  In  my  name." 

t  As  (though  with  another  motive)  in  Acts,  xix.,  13. 


ACTING  IN  THE  NAME  OF  CHRIST.  289 

way  to  a  true  acting  in  that  name.  He,  therefore,  reproved  them  ; 
they  should  let  this  stand-point  pass  as  a  preparatory  one :  "  Forbid 
him  not  [for  there  is  no  man  which  can  do  a  miracle  in  my  name  ichicli 
can  lightly  speak  evil  oftne]  ;  for  he  that  is  not  against  you  is  for  yoti.'" 
The  explanation  (in  brackets)  is  given  by  Mark,  but  not  by  Luke  ;  it 
aids  the  interpretation  of  the  latter  clause,  but  does  not  exhaust  its 
meaning. 

These  words  of  Christ  allow  us  to  suppose  that  the  man  in  question, 
perhaps,  only  used  His  name  by  way  of  conjuration,  and  was  far  from 
him  in  heart ;  but  they  imply,  also,  that  the  veiy  fact  of  his  giving 
credit  to  the  Name  for  so  great  power  might  lead  him  to  inquire  who 
and  what  Christ  was,  and  to  attach  himself  to  him.  His  procedure, 
also,  might  call  the  attention  of  others  to  Chiist's  power,  and  bring 
them  nearer  to  his  communion.  Jesus  here  taught  the  disciples  (and 
the  lesson  was  a  most  weighty  one  for  their  coming  labours)  that  they 
were  not  to  requii'e  a  perfect  faith  and  an  immediate  attachment  to 
their  communion  from  men  at  once;  that  they  were  to  recognize 
preparatory  and  intermediate  stages ;  to  drive  back  no  one  whose  face 
was  turned  in  the  right  direction ;  to  hinder  none  who  might  wish  to 
confess  or  glorify  Christ  among  men  in  any  way  ;  in  a  word,  to  oppose 
no  one  who,  instead  of  offering  himself,  in  this  sense,  to  them,  sought 
the  same  end,  and  thus  advanced  the  object  of  their  ministry,  even 
though  out  of  their  own  communion,  and  not  seeking  to  glorify  Christ 
pi'ecisely  in  the  same  sense  and  by  the  same  methods  as  themselves. 

Comparing  this  saying  of  Christ  with  the  other  and  opposite  one,  to 
which  we  have  before  referred,*  viz.,  "iJe  that  is  not  for  me  is  against 
me,''  we  must,  in  order  to  harmonize  them,  seek  the  precise  objects 
which  He  had  in  view  in  the  two  cases.  In  the  latter,  an  action  was 
treated  of  which  seemed  to  agree  perfectly  with  Christ  in  its  results — 
the  expulsion  of  evil  spirits — but  yet  not  done  in  the  Spirit  of  Christ  at 
all,  but  just  the  opposite;  apparently  done^or  the  kingdom  of  God, 
but,  in  fact,  against  it ;  outwardly  like  Christ's  acts,  but  inwardly  and 
essentially  antagonistic  to  them.  In  the  former  there  was  an  act,  again, 
agreeing  in  result,  and  also  in  the  mode,  viz.,  by  calling  upon  the  name 
of  Christ ;  not,  it  is  true,  entirely  in  the  right  way,  but  in  a  way 
preparatory  to  the  right  one,  and  which  might  lead  to  it,  if  not  dis- 
turbed by  an  impatient  zeal.  In  the  former  the  outward  coincidences 
concealed  an  Inward  and  essential  opposition,  but  in  the  latter  an  in- 
ward affinity,  which  might  possibly  be  ripened  into  full  communion. 

The  common  feature,  therefore,  of  these  two  sayings  is  this:  Every 
thing  depends  upon  the  relation  in  which  the  outward  act  and  its  re- 
sults stand  to  the  spirit  and  the  heart  from  which  they  proceed. 

*  Cf.  p.  241. 

T 


290  JOURNEY  TO  NORTH  GALILEE. 

§191.    The  Stater  i7i  the  Fish.     (Matt.,  xvii.,  27.) 
Christ's  previous  visit  to  Capernaum  probably  took  place  at  the  time 
set  apart  for  collecting  the  Temple  ti-ibute  of  half  an  ounce  of  silver, 
i.  e.,  the  month  Adar,  corresponding  nearly  to  our  March.     It  is  likely 
that  the  great  commotion  which  we  have  before  described  as  occurring 
just  before  his  departure  had  prevented  him  at  that  time  from  paying 
it.     On  his  return,  the  collectors  came  to  Peter,  who  was  regarded  as 
the  spokesman  of  the  little  society,  and  asked  why  his  Master  did  not 
pay  the  tribute.     Christ  and  his  disciples  were  known  to  perform  all 
duties   arising  from  the   natural  relations   of  life  faithfully;'  but  this 
tribute  belonged  to  the  religious  constitution,  and  implied  a  relation  of 
dependence  upon  the  Theocracy  ;  and,  as  it  became  constantly  more  ev- 
ident that  he  claimed  to  be  the  Messiah,  they  perhaps  doubted  whether 
he  would  recognize  its  obligation.     Peter,  as  we  have  seen,  was  at 
that  time  full  of  the  idea  of  Messiah,  which  he  saw  realized  in  Jesus  ; 
and  he  might,  therefore,  naturally  conclude  that  the  latter,  as  Head  of 
the  Theocracy,  was  not  subject  to  the  tribute.     But,  on  the  other  hand, 
he  had  just  heard  from  the  lips  of  Jesus  that  his  kingdom  was  not  t<> 
be  an  outward  one,  and  that  he  should  suffer  before  his  dominion  could 
be  seen ;  and,  in  this  view,  he  might  be  subject  to  the  tax.     With  his 
usual  promptness,  he  answered  the  question  in  the  affirmative,  without 
knowing  where  the  tribute  was  to  come  from ;  for,  perhaps  because  as 
they  had  just  returned  from  a  long  journey,  they  were  out  of  money.* 
Christ  decided  to  pay  the  tax,  and  showed  Peter  that  the  act  formed 
part  of  the  self-abasement  to  which,  conscious  of  his  own  dignity,  he 
submitted  himself  during  his  earthly  life.     He  illustrated  this  by  a  com- 
])arison  dravioi  from  human  relations.     As  kings  do  not  tax  their  own 
children,  so  the  Messiah,  the  Son  of  G-od  and  Theocratic  King,  for 
whose  appearance  the  whole  Temple  discipline  was  but  preparatory, 
was  not  bound  to  pay  this  purely  ecclesiastical  tax ;  his  relations  to 
the  Theocracy  were  against  it.     Had  the  Jews  known  him  for  what 
he  was,  viz.,  the  Messiah,  they  would  not  have  asked  him  to  pay  it.t 
But  since  they  did  not,  he  wished  to  afford  them  no  occasion,  even  from 
their  own   stand-point,  to  accuse  him  as  a  violator  of  the  law.     He 
places  himself  on  a  footing  with  them,  as  to  the  duties  devolving  upon 

*  This  account  suits  well  to  the  historical  coiinexiou  in  which  it  occurs,  Matt.,  xvii.,  -li ; 
but  then  wc  cannot  take  the  month  Adar  strictly.  If  this  last  cannot  be  allowed,  we 
must  place  the  occurrence  immediately  after  the  feeding  of  the  5000 ;  as  the  multitude 
then  wished  to  proclaim  Jesus  as  Messiah,  the  collectors  might  well  doubt  of  his  payin;,' 
the  tax.  We  cannot  think,  with  Wieselcr,  that  the  tax  was  due  to  the  Empire,  for  tlu; 
whole  import  of  the  nan-ative  turns  upon  its  being  a  Temple  tax,  and  not  a  political  one. 

+  Dc  WcUc's  remarks  on  the  duty  of  obedience  to  magistrates,  rcfciring  to  Rom.,  xiii.,  il, 
are  not  applicable  here  ;  the  relation  involved  in  this  case  was  the  Theocratic-political  rela- 
tion, which  was  to  be  abolished  by  Christ,  with  the  whole  fonn  of  that  Theocracy. 


PRECAUTIONS  AGAINST  THE  SANHEDRIM.  291 

Bubordinate  members  of  the  Theocracy.  Nor  did  he  work  a  miracle 
to  procure  the  tribute-money,  but  directed  Peter  to  make  use  of  the 
means  which  his  trade  supplied.  In  a  place  where  fishing  was  the 
common  trade  of  the  people,  it  was  not  likely  that  the  first  fish  cauoht 
would  be  worth  the  whole  sum  needed  ;  but  an  unusual  blessio"-  of 
Providence,  as  Christ  well  knew,  attended  the  effort.  The  very  first 
fish  caught  was  to  supply  the  means ;  a  stater,  which  it  had  swallowed, 
was  found  within  it. 

By  his  procedure  in  this  case,  Christ  taught  the  Apostles  that  they 
were  not  to  claim  all  their  rights,  but  to  submit  in  all  cases  where  re- 
gard to  the  needs  of  others  required  it ;  and,  further,  that  they  mitrht 
look  with  confidence  for  the  blessing  of  Ctod  upon  the  means  employed 
by  them  to  comply  with  such  demands.  It  is  worthy  of  note  that  this 
lesson  was  given  to  Peter,  in  whose  name  a  course  of  conduct  precisely 
opposed  to  that  which  it  conveyed  was  often  practiced  in  after  ages. 


CHAPTER  XI. 

CHRIST'S  journey' TO  JERUSALEM  TO  ATTEND   THE   FEAST  OF  TAB- 
ERNACLES. 

§   192.    His  Precautions  against  the  Persecutions  of  the   Saukedrim. 

(John,  vii.) 

FOR  nearly  eighteen  months  Christ  had  been  employed  in  scatter- 
ing the  seed  of  the  kingdom  of  God  in  Galilee,  and  in  training 
the  Apostles  for  their  calling.  Durhig  all  this  time  he  had  kept  away 
from  the  metropolis,  to  which  he  had  before  been  used  to  go  at  the 
time  of  the  three  chief  feasts. 

The  Feast  of  Tabernacles  occurred  during  the  month  of  October ; 
and  he  determined  to  attend  it,  in  oixler  to  confirm  the  faith  of  such  as 
had  received  Divine  impressions  from  his  former  labours  in  Jerusalem, 
and  to  avoid  the  imputation,  likely  otherwise  to  be  cast  on  him,  that  he 
feared  to  give  public  testimony  to  his  Divine  calling  in  presence  of  his 
enemies  and  the  Sanhedrim.  It  was  his  rule  of  conduct  to  avoid,  by 
prudent  choice  of  time  and  place,  all  such  dangers  as  were  not  neces- 
sarily to  be  met  in  the  course  of  duty ;  he  determined,  therefore,  to 
appear  suddenly  in  the  city,  after  the  body  of  visitors  to  the  feast  had 
arrived,  before  the  Sanhcdi'im  could  take  measures  to  seize  upon  his 
person.* 

*  John,  vii.,  fi.  The  mention  of  this  circumstance  by  John  proves  his  veracity  as  an 
eyewitness.  A  mereljttraditional  or  invented  narrative  would  liave  said  nothing  about  it, 
as  tending  to  lower  the  estimate  of  Christ's  divinity  ainJ  supernatural  power. 


^ 


292  JOURNEY  TO  JERUSALEM. 

The  minds  of  his  own  brothers  Avere  not  fully  made  up  as  to  his 
cliaracter.*  When  they  were  about  to  set  out  for  the  feast,  they  could 
not  understand  why  he  remained  behind.  They  expressed  their  sur- 
prise that  he  kept  his  ministry  so  concealed.  If  he  wrought  such  great 
woi'kst  (they  told  him),  he  should  not  confine  himself  to  such  a  corner 
as  Galilee,  but  should  make  his  followers,  gathered  from  different  quar- 
ters to  the  feast  at  Jerusalem,  witnesses  of  his  miracles,  and  accredit 
himself  as  Messiah  publicly,  before  the  assembled  nation.  Imbued 
with  such  sentiments,  and  incapable  of  apprehending  tlie  reasons  of 
Christ's  conduct,  they  did  not  deserve  his  confidence,  and  needed  to  be 
made  conscious  that  they  did  not.  He,  therefore,  only  told  them  that  his 
relations  to  the  world  were  different  from  theirs ;  that  his  movements 
were  not  to  be  judged  by  theirs  ;  that  his  motives  must  be  unknown  to 
them,  as  tkci/  were  engaged  in  no  struggle  with  the  world,  and  had  no- 
thing to  fear  at  Jerusalem.  He  did  not  say,  however,  but  that  there 
would  be,  subsequently,  a  proper  time  for  himself  to  go :  "  Mi/  time  is 
not  yet  come  to  show  myself  publicly  at  Jerusalem  ;  but  you  need  not 
wait  to  choose  the  favourable  moment,  for  your  time  is  always  ready  : 
you  have  nothing  to  fear;  t/tc  world  cannot  hate  you,  for  it  looks  upon 
you  as  its  own ;  but  me  it  hateth,  because  I  testify  of  it  that  the  works 
thereof  are  evil.  Go  ye  up  unto  this  feast  ;  I  go  not  yet  up,  because  my 
time  is  not  yet  full  come." 

He  afterward  set  out  unnoticed,  and  arrived  at  Jerusalem  about  the 
middle  of  the  eight-days'  feast.  Great  anxiety  for  his  arrival  had  been 
felt,  and  the  most  opposite  opinions  had  been  expressed  concerning 
him.  We  need  not  be  surprised  to  find  the  charge  of  Sabbath-break- 
ing still  fi-esh,  though  eighteen  months  had  elapsed ;  for  this  was  al- 
ways the  favourite  starting-point  of  the  Pharisees  in  their  accusations 
against  him,  both  in  the  city  and  through  their  agents  in  Galilee. 

§  193.  He  explaifis  the  Nature  of  his  Doctrine  as  Divine  Revelation 
(John,  vii.,  16-19.) 
Anew  the  power  of  Christ's  words  over  the  hearts  of  the  people 
displayed  itself.  Even  those  who  were  prepossessed  against  him  had 
to  wonder  that  one  who  had  not  been  taught  in  the  schools  of  the 
scribes  could  thus  expound  the  Scriptures ;  yet  they  could  not,  from 
the  force  of  prejudice,  admit  that  his  knowledge  was  derived  from  any 
higher  source.  Their  conclusion  was  soon  made  u^  that  nothing  could 
be  true  that  had  not  been  learned  in  the  schools  ;  and  that  one  not  edu- 
cated in  them  had  no  right  to  set  up  for  a  teacher.  In  view  of  this, 
Christ  said  publicly,  in  the  Temple,  "  Wonder  not  that  I,  all  uneduca- 

*  Cf.  p.  244. 

t  Little  as  .Tolin  relates  of  Clirist's  liibrmv.s  in  Galilee,  ho  implies  thein  iu  vii.,  3,  4.     Tl.is 
passage  obviously  alludes  to  a  chasm  tilled  up  bj-  the  other  Evangelists. 


ATTEMPTS  OF  THE  PHARISEES.  293 

ted  in  your  schools,  appear  to  teach  you ;  my  teaching  is  not  mine,  hut 
his  that  sent  me  ;  not  invented  by  me  as  a  man,  but  revealed  by  God. 
liut  for  your  lack  of  the  right  will,  you  might  be  convinced  of  this.* 
Whoever  in  heart  desires  to  do  the  will  of  God,  will,  by  means  of  that 
disposition,  be  able  to  decide  whether  my  teaching  is  Divine  or  human. 
Such  a  one  may  see  that  no  human  self-will  is  mixed  up  with  my  la- 
bours, but  that  in  them  all  I  seek  only  to  glorify  Him  that  sent  me. 
But  (v.  19)  that  ye  lack  the  spirit  essential  to  this,  is  shown  by  your 
deeds ;  pretending  to  zeal  for  the  Mosaic  law,  and  using  that  pretence 
to  persecute  one  who  seeks  only  to  honour  God,  you  care  not,  in  real- 
ity, to  keep  that  law." 

It  astonished  the  people  to  find  that  Jesus  could  testify  thus  openly 
against  his  opponents,  and  yet  no  hand  be  laid  upon  him  ;  and  they 
asked,  "  Can  it  be  possible  that  the  membei's  of  the  Sanhedrim  know 
this  man  to  be  the  Messiah?"  (v.  26).  But  they  continued,  still  held 
in  the  prejudice  and  bondage  of  sense,  "  How  can  it  be  so,  when  we 
know  him  to  be  the  son  of  the  Nazarene  carpenter  1  while  the  Messiah' 
is  to  reveal  himself  suddenly  in  all  his  glory,  so  that  all  must  acknowl- 
edge him"  (v.  27).  To  expose  the  vanity  of  these  expressions,  Christ 
said,  "  It  is  true,  ye  both  know  me,  and  ye  hnoio  whence  I  am  ;  and  yet 
ye  know  not;  for  ye  know  not  the  heavenly  Father  who  hath  sent 
me,  and  therefore  ye  cannot  know  rae."  Thus  does  he  ever  return  to 
the  principle  that  "  only  those  who  know  God,  and  belong  to  him  in 
heart  (^.  c.,  who  I'eally  endeavour  to  do  his  will),  can  be  in  a  condition 
to  recognize  the  Son  of  God  in  his  self-manifestation,  and  to  acknowl- 
edge that  he  is  from  heaven.  Those  who  are  estranged  from  God 
and  slaves  to  sense,  think  they  know  him,  but  in  fact  do  not." 

§  194.    The  Pharisees  attempt  to  arrest   Christ. — He  warns  them  that 
they  should  seek  Him,  but  should  not  find  Hun.     (John,  vii.,  30,  seq.)  ''• 
The  increasing  influence  of  Christ's  words  and  works  naturally  ex- 

*  John,  vii.,  17.  With  Schott  and  Liccke,  I  deviate  from  the  old  exegesis  which  refers 
tliis  passage  to  the  testimony  of  inward  experience,  the  testimonium  Spirilus  Sancii. 
Not  the  will  of  God,  as  revealed  by  Christ,  was  the  aim  of  discourse  here,  but  the  will  ot 
God,  as  far  as  the  Pharisees  themselves  might  have  known  it ;  so  that,  "  to  do  the  will  of 
God"="to  make  the  glory  of  God  the  object  of  one's  actions,"  as  opposed  to  "following 
one's  own  will,  and  seeking  one's  own  honour."  When  Christ  had  to  do  with  such  as  did 
not  fully  believe,  but  were  on  the  way  to  faith,  he  could  say,  "  Try  only  to  follow  the  draw- 
ing within  you,  to  submit  to  my  teaching  and  practice  it,  and  all  your  doubts  will  be 
practically  solved.  Your  hearts  will  feel  the  Divine  power  of  my  teaching,  and  this  ex- 
perience will  remove  the  difficulties  from  which  j-ou  cannot  free  yourselves."  But  the 
persons  to  whom  he  was  speaking  in  this  instance  were  far  removed  from  faith  ;  and  to 
such  he  had  to  point  out  objective  tests  by  which  they  might  judge  of  the  Divinity  of  his 
mission ;  but,  as  they  were  destitute  of  the  dispositions  requisite  to  apply  these  tests 
properly,  he  had  to  show  them  distinctly  that  they  lacked  the  will  to  be  convinced,  the  ear- 
nest of  which  is  obedience  to  the  will  of  God.  He  was  justified  in  making  this  demand 
for  a  proper  disposition  universal,  as  without  it  all  argument  and  proof  must  be  in  vain. 


294  CHRIST  AT  JERUSALEM. 

cited  the  fears  and  jealousy  of  the  heads  of  the  Pharisaical  party ; 
their  domination  was  in  danger  from  a  spiritual  power  directly  op- 
]iosed  to  their  spirit  and  statutes.  He  had  so  often,  both  in  Jerusalem 
and  Galilee,  overcome  their  machinations  by  the  power  of  truth,  and 
frustrated  their  charges  of  heresy  by  his  words  and  works,  that  no 
course  was  left  but  to  withdraw  him  from  his  sphere  of  labour  by  ac- 
tual force. 

They  sought,  therefore,  to  lay  hold  of  his  person  ;  but  Christ,  per- 
ceiving their  plans,  declared  in  words  of  prophetic  warning,  "  Yet  a 
Jittle  ivhilc  I  am  with  you,  and  then  will  I  go  back  unto  him  that  sent 
me.  Ye  shall  seek  vie,  and  shall  not  find,  me  ;  and  toherc  I  am,  thither 
ye  cannot  comey  He  thus  warned  the  Jews,  that  if  they  did  not  use 
the  time  that  was  rapidly  passing,  they  would  not  be  able  to  escape  the 
distress  that  was  to  come  upon  them  by  their  own  fault.  In  that  time 
of  trouble  they  would  long  the  more  earnestly  for  the  Deliverer  and 
Messiah — whom  they  might  have  known — but  in  vain ;  they  could 
then  find  no  Redeemer,  nor  obtain  the  fellowship  of  Him  who  would 
have  been  raised  into  heaven.  The  Jews  maliciously  interpreted  this 
<lark  saying  to  mean  that  he  intended  to  go  forth  as  a  teacher  of  the 
heathen  (v,  35) ;  a  point  worthy  of  note,  from  the  inference  it  allows, 
that  their  anxiety  to  make  him  a  heretic  was  founded  upon  a  dawning 
presentiment  that  hia  teaching  was  destined  to  be  a  universal  one. 

§  195.   Christ  a  Spring  of  Living  Water,  and  the  Light  of  the  World. 

(John,  vii.,  38,  seq.) — The  Validity  of  His    Testimony  of  Himself 

(John,  viii.,  13,  seq.) — Heforetels  the  subsequent  Relations  of  the  Jews 

to  Hiffi.     (John,  viii.,  21.) 

It  was  the  last  chief  feast  of  the  last  year  of  Christ's  labours  uptm 
earth  ;  and  he  could  not  let  it  pass  without,  at  its  conclusion,  giving  a 
•.  special  message  to  the  multitudes  who  were  soon  to  be  scattered 
through  the  country,  and  many  of  whom  would  never  see  him  more. 
Under  various  figures  he  represented  himself  to  them  as  the  source  of 
true  riches  and  unfailing  contentment,  and  thus  stimulated  their  long- 
ing for  him. 

Thus  did  he  cry  out  to  the  congregation  in  the  Temple  (probably 
alluding  to  the  ceremony  in  which  the  priests,  in  great  pomp,  brought 
water  from  the  spring  of  Siloa  to  the  altar),  "  Here  is  the  true  spring 
of  living  water;  if  any  man  thirst,  let  him  come  unto  7ne  and  drinh. 
Whosoever  believeth  on  me,  his  inward  life  shall  become  a  well-spring, 
whence  shall  flow  streams  of  living  water."*     And  in  another  figure 

*  These  words  were  not  uttered  by  Christ  as  a  prediction,  but  as  a  declaration  of  the 
power  of  faith  in  developing  the  Divine  life.  But  as  it  was  not  fidly  realized  until  the 
outpouring  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  that  stream  of  living  water  which  flows  without  ccasini; 
through  the  communion  of  believers  in  all  ages.  John  justly  aijjilied  them  to  this  (v.  39),  as 
illustrated  in  the  progress  of  the  Church  before  his  eyes  when  he  wrote. 


THE  WITxNESS  OF  CHRIST.  295 

(viii.,  12)  he  declared  that  he  was  to  be  in  the  spiritual  world  what  the 
sun  is  in  the  material.  "  I  am  the  light  of  the  world  ;  he  that  followcth 
•me  shall  not  walk  in  darkness,  but  shall  have  the  light  wliich  beams 
forth  from  life  and  leads  to  life."* 

The  Pharisees  objected  (viii.,  13)  that  Christ  s  testimo7iy  was  worth- 
less, because  it  was  given  of  himself  Christ,  in  reply,  admitted  that 
self-witness  is  not  generally  valid,  but  declared  that  in  his  case  it  was, 
because  he  testified  of  himself  with  the  confidence  and  clearness  of  a 
consciousness  founded  in  Divinity.  "  ThougJi  1  bear  ivitness  of  my- 
self my  testimony  is  true  j  for  I  know  whence  I  came  and  whither  I  go'" 
(a  higher  self-consciousness,  transcending,  in  its  confidence,  aJl  doubt 
and  self-deception  ;  tha  eternal  Light  beaming  through  the  human  con- 
sciousness). Judging  merely  by  outward  appeai-ance,  and  incapable 
of  apprehending  the  Divine  in  him,  they  were  deceived  (v.  15).  But 
his  testimony  and  judgment  were  true,  because  not  given  by  himself 
as  a  man  of  himself,  but  by  him  ivith  the  Father  (v.  19).  Thus  there 
were  two  witnesses  :  his  own  subjective  testimony,  infallible  because 
of  his  communion  with  the  Father;  and  the  objective  testimony  of  the 
Father  himself,  given  in  his  manifestation  and  ministry  as  a  whole. 

But  these  carnal-minded  men,  unsusceptible  for  this  spiritual  revela- 
tion of  the  Father  in  the  manifestation  and  works  of  his  son,  still 
asked,  "  Where  is  this  witness  %  let  us  hear  the  Father's  voice,  and 
behold  his  appearance."  He  showed  them,  in  turn,  that  the  knowledge 
of  Him  and  of  the  Father  were  interdependent;  that  they  could  not 
know  him  as  he  was,  because  they  knew  not  the  Father  ;  and  that 
they  could  not  know  the  Father,  because  they  knew  not  the  Son  in 
Avhom  he  revealed  himself. 

Again,  with  reference  to  the  continued  persecutions  of  the  Sanhe- 
drim, Christ  repeated  the  saying,  "  I  go,  and  you  loill  seek  me  ;"  add- 
ing, also,  the  reason  why  they  should  seek  in  vain  (v.  21),  "  Because 
ye  will  not  believe  in  the  Redeemer,  but  die  in  your  sins,  and  there- 
fore be  excluded  from  heaven  ;"  because  (as  he  himself  explained  it,  v. 
23)  there  was  an  impassable  gulf  between  those  that  belong  to  this 
world  and  Him  who  did  not.  But  the  prophetic  words  in  v.  28  were 
not  spoken  with  reference  to  these,  but  to  others :  *'  When  ye  have  lifted 

*  Cf.  these  words,  "  the  light  of  life,  the  light  u-hich  give.th  life,''  with  "  Ihe  bread  of  life," 
p.  266.  The  "light"  precedes  ;  as  Christ  enliyhtens  the  darkened  world,  and  thus  leads  it 
from  death  unto  life.  He  appears  first  to  the  dark  soul  as  the  erdighteuing  teacher  of  trath. 
in  order  to  raise  it  to  cominuniou  with  liiuiself,  and  so  to  partake  of  the  Divine  Hfe.  The 
relation  of  "light"  and  "life"  is  not  outward  and  indirect,  but  inward  and  direct.  The 
light  and  the  life  arc  from  the  same  Giver;  sometimes  the  one  is  made  more  prominent, 
sometimes  the  other,  according  to  the  bearings  iu  wliich  he  is  spoken  of;  the  life  as  light 
(John,  i.,  4),  or  the  light  of  lifo. 


296  CHRIST  AT  JERUSALEM. 

■up  the  Son  of  JSIan,  then  shall  ye  know  that  I  am  He,  and  that  I  do  no- 
thing of  myself ;  but  as  viy  Father  hath  taught  me,  I  speak  these  tilings.'^ 
This  was  spoken  of  such  as  then  mistook  the  Son  of  Man  in  his  human 
appearance  (who  might  have  fallen  into  the  pardonahle  sin  of  blas- 
phemy against  the  Son  of  Man,  Matt.,  xii.,  32),  but  who,  still  possess- 
ing a  dormant  susceptibility  kept  down  by  prejudice,  would  be  led  to 
believe,  by  the  invisible  workings  of  his  Divine  Spirit,  when  they  should 
see  that  work  which  was  believed  to  be  suppressed  by  his  death, 
spreading  abroad  with  irresistible  power. 

§  196.  The  Connexion  between  Steadfastness,  Truth,  and  Freedom. 
(John,  viii.,  30-32.)  Freedom  and  Servitude ;  their  typleal  Clean- 
ing (3.3-38). 

The  Divine  superiority  with  which  Christ  silenced  his  opponents 
completed  the  impressions  of  his  previous  ministry  in  the  minds  of 
many  of  the  people  :  "  As  he  spake  these  words,  many  believed  on  him.'" 
But  he  did  not  suffer  himself  to  be  carried  away  by  the  enthusiasm  of 
the  multitude.  He  says  that  many  of  them  lacked  true,  spiritual  faith, 
and  knew  that  they  would  easily  be  turned  aside,  if  he  should  not,  as 
Messiah,  satisfy  their  expectations.  In  order,  therefore,  to  point  out 
the  requisites  of  true  discipleship,  and  to  show  what  they  might,  and 
what  they  might  not,  expect  of  him,  he  said  (v.  31,  32),  "Only  by 
holding  fast  my  doctrine  can  ye  be  my  disciples  indeed  ;  and  then  only 
(when  you  shall  have  incorporated  the  truth  with  your  life)  will  you 
know  the  truth  (the  knowledge,  therefore,  springing  from  the  life),  and 
the  power  of  the  truth,  thus  rightly  known,  shall  make  you  partakers 
of  true  freedom." 

Judas  of  Gamala  and  the  Zelotists  had  incited  the  people  to  expect 
in  Messiah  a  deliverer  from  the  temporal  yoke  of  the  Romans.  In  the 
words  above  cited,  Christ  contrasted  his  own  aims  with  such  as  these. 
Those  who  were  inclined  to  look  upon  him  as  a  temporal  Messiah 
were  to  be  taught  that  the  true  freedom,  without  which  there  can  be 
no  other,  is  inward  and  spiritual  ;  and  that  this  alone  was  the  freedom 
which  he  had  come  to  bestow,  a  liberty  not  to  be  communicated  from 
witho4it,  but  to  spring  up  from  within,  through  the  interpenetration  of 
His  truth  with  the  practical  life.  The  fact  that  his  words  were  per- 
verted or  misunderstood  (v.  33),  even  if  not  by  those  who  had  attach- 
ed themselves  to  him  with  some  degree  of  susceptibility,  gave  him 
occasion  to  develope  their  import  still  further. 

The  same  2>crsons  who  were  wont  to  sigh  under  the  Roman  yoke  as 
a  disgraceful  servitude,  now  felt  their  Theocratic  pride  offended  be- 
cause Christ  described  them  as  "  servants,  who  had  to  be  made  free," 
a  disgrace  for  descendants  of  Abraham  (v.  33).     In  view  of  this  pride 


ATTEMPTS  OF  THE  SANHEDRIM.  297 

of  the  Theocratic  people,  and  the  carnal  confidence  which  they  indulg- 
ed in  their  outward  dignity,  a  dignity  unaccompanied  by  jiroper  dis- 
positions, Jesus  said,  "  Whosoever  committeih  sin  is  the  servant  of  sin. 
The  servant  abidcth  not  in  the  house  forever  ;  he  may  be  expelled  for 
his  faults ;  but  the  8on  of  the  house  abideth  in  it  ever.  And  the  iion 
of  the  house  may  obtain  liberty  for  the  servant,  and  make  him  a  free 
member  of  the  household.  Think  not,  therefore,  that  ye  have  an  inalien- 
able claim  to  the  kingdom  of  God  ;  you  may,  for  your  unfaithfulness, 
like  disobedient  servants,  be  excluded  from  it.  Only  when  the  Son  of 
God,  who  guides  the  Theocracy  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  shall  make 
you  free,  will  you  be  free  indeed ;  no  more  as  servants  of  the  kingdom 
of  God,  but  as  free  members  thereof,  as  children." 

They  boasted  without  reason,  he  told  them,  of  being  Abraham's 
children.  By  attempting  the  life  of  one  who  was  offering  them  the 
truth,  and  thus  acting  as  enemies  to  the  truth,  they  showed  themselves 
children  of  Satan*  rather  than  of  Abraham  ;  their  disposition  and 
actions  savoured  more  of  the  Father  of  lies  than  the  Father  of  the 
faithful  (v.  37-44).  The  cause  of  their  unbelief,  therefore,  was  pre- 
cisely this,  that  their  disposition  of  heart  was  the  reverse  of  Abra- 
ham's. Him,  whom  Abraham  longed  for,  they  sought  to  destroy.  He 
employed  thus  the  misunderstanding  of  the  Jews  to  bring  anew  before 
them  the  idea  of  Messiah  as  Son  of  God  in  the  higher  sense,  an  idea 
always  a  stumbling-blockt  to  those  who  entertained  carna^^  conceptions 
of  Messiah.  This  excited  their  rage  anew,  and  drew  upon  him  the 
accusation  of  blasphemy.| 

§  197.  Vain  Attempts  of  the  Sanhedrim  against  Christ.  (John,  vii.,  40- 
53.) — Dispute  in  the  Sanhedrim. — First  Decision  against  Christ, 
Christ  continued  his  labours  in  Jerusalem  for  a  time  after  the  close 
of  the  feast.  The  Sanhedrim  gradually  assumed  a  more  hostile  atti- 
tude, and  would  have  taken  violent  measures  at  once,  had  not  a  divis- 
ion ensued  between  the  fanatical  zealots  who  held  that  any  means 
were  justifiable,  and  those  who,  with  various  degrees  of  hostility,  were 
more  moderate  in  their  opinions  and  feelings.  Even  during  the  con- 
tinuance of  the  feast  they  had  sought  to  seize  his  person,  but  part  of 

*  Cf.  p.  148.  t  Cf.  p.  2G6. 

I  As  interpreters  have  often  remarked  on  Jobn,  viii.,  57,  the  expression  of  the  Jews  was 
not  inconsistent  with  the  fact  of  Christ's  being  just  thirly  years  old.  "  Thou  art  not  yet 
fjly,  and  hast  thou  seen  Abraham,  who  hved  so  many  centuries  ago  1"  (Christ  was  at  the 
beginning  of  the  middle  period  of  hfe,  ending  vr\th  ffty,  in  which  year  tlie  Levites  were 
freed  from  the  regular  service  of  the  Temple,  Numb.,  iv.,  3  ;  viii.,  26.)  Nothing  but  wilfulness 
could  lead  IVcisse  and  Gforer  to  conclude,  in  contradiction  to  all  the  accounts  and  to  intemal 
probability,  that  Jesus  was  much  older  tlian  is  generally  supposed  when  he  entered  on  his 
public  ministry.  On  the  tradition  that  Jesus  was  nearly  fifty,  which  arose  from  a  misun- 
derstanding of  these  words,  cf  my  Geschichle  den  Apostol.  Zeitallers,  3d.  ed.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  539. 


298  '  CHRIST  IN  JERUSALEM. 

the  multitude  were  on  his  side ;  and  even  the  officers  of  the  Sanhe- 
drim that  were  sent  to  take  him,  unable  to  resist  the  impression  of  his 
appearance  and  words,  returned  with  the  exclamation,  "  Neve?'  man 
spake  like  this  jnanJ" 

The  dominant  party  sought  to  secure  the  immediate  condemnation 
of  Jesus  as  a  violator  of  the  law  and  a  blasphemer ;  but  there  were 
others  who  felt  the  power  of  his  words  and  works  more  than  they 
openly  confessed;  as,  for  instance,  Nicodemus,  who  said,  "Doth  our 
hnv  judge  any  man  before  it  hear  him  V  This  had  to  be  admitted  even 
by  the  rest ;  but,  as  is  usual  in  such  cases,  the  more  moderate  party 
incurred  the  suspicion  of  the  zealots.  And  when  the  latter  found  that 
they  could  not  succeed  in  condemning  Christ  personally,  they  proposed, 
to  lessen  his  influence  at  least  in  some  degree,  that  every  one  who 
acknowledged  him  as  Messiah  should  be  excommunicated.  In  this 
they  ^presupposed  that  the  Sanhedrim  was  the  highest  legislative  and 
executive  authority  in  religious  affaire  ;  and  that  no  recognition  but 
its  own,  of  any  Divine  calling,  and  especially  of  the  highest,  the  Mes- 
siahship,  would  be  valid.  The  result  was,  that,  although  no  decisive 
judgment  was  pronounced  against  the  person  of  Christ,  it  was  madu 
punishable  for  any  one  to  recognize  him  apart  from  the  authority  of 
the  Sanhedrim.  This,  then,  was  the  first  decree  pronounced  against 
Christ.     (John,  ix.,  22.) 

§  19S.  A  man,  horn  Blind,  healed  on  the  Sahhath. — Christ''s  Conversa- 
tion at  the  Time. — Individual  Sufferings  not  to  he  judged  as  PunisJi- 
mentfor  Sins. —  Christ  the  Light  of  the  World.     (John,  ix.) 
If  the  charge  of  heresy  brought  against  Christ,  on  account  of  the 
pretended  violation  of  the  Sabbath,  produced  such  striking  results,  he 
gave  a  new  stimulus  to  the  rage,  and,  at  the  same  time,  to  the  jealousy, 
of  the  hierarchical  party,  by  a  miraculous  cure  performed  on  the  Sab- 
bath. 

As  the  disciples  were  leaving  the  Temple  with  their  Master,  his  at- 
tention was  drawn,  in  passing,  to  a  beggar  who  had  been  blind  from 
his  birth.  Their  first  thought,  suggested  by  their  contracted  Jewish 
ideas  of  the  government  of  God,*  was,  how  far  the  necessary  connexion 
between  sin  and  evil  might  be  supposed  in  the  case:  '■'Master,  n'liodid 
sin,  this  man  or  his  parents,  tJiat  he  was  horn  hlindV  An  untenable 
theory  drove  them  to  this  dilemma ;  even  if,  as  it  is  hardly  to  be  sup- 
posed that  the  pre-existcnce  of  souls  was  presupposed  by  the  questioner, 
be  either  had  no  definite  idea  in  refemng  to  "  this  man,"  or  did  not 
know  certainly  at  the  time  that  he  was  bom  blind.  Christ,  not  admit- 
tin"  such  a  precise  connexion  between  special  sins  and  special  evils,  re 

"  Cf.  p.  143,  144. 


CURE  OF  THE  BLIND  MAN.  299 

plied,  at  first,  concisely,  '■'Neither  hath  this  man  sinned,  nor  his  i)arents;* 
hut  that  the  tvorks  of  God  should  be  made  manifest  in  him  ;''^  that  his 
suffering's  might  seem  the  higher  objects  of  God's  love  both  to  himself 
and  others,  and  God's  works  of  saving  power  and  mercy  be  displayed 
in  him.  And  for  himself,  apart  from  others,  the  cure  of  his  physical 
blindness  was  to  lead  to  that  of  his  spiritual  darkness  ;  and  then  his 
experience  was  to  become,  also,  the  means  of  saving  others.  Passing 
over  directly  to  the  remark  that  through  himsef  the  works  of  God 
were  revealed,  Christ  said,  "I  must  work  the  loorks  of  him  that  sent  me 
while  it  is  day  ;\  the  night  cometh,  when  the  work  of  the  day  cannot  be 
done.|     As  long  as  1  am  in  the  icorld,  I  am  tlie  light  of  the  toorldy^ 

The  cure  for  which  he  thus  prepared  them  was  probably  gradual 
(as  in  the  case  mentioned  p.  270) ;  the  patient,  perhaps,  began  to  see 
when  Christ  anointed  his  eyes,  and,  after  bathing  in  Siloam,||  was  com- 
pletely healed.^ 

*  An  apoci";v-pbal  writer  would  have  made  Christ  contradict  this  view  more  fully. 

t  The  day,  the  time  for  lahoxir ;  its  fleeting  hours  must  be  improved.  "I  cannot  let  the 
opportunity  pass  without  doing  what  I  only  upon  earth  can  do.  My  stay  here  will  soon 
end.  Nothing,  therefore,  must  hinder  me  from  that  which  I  (as  the  shining  Sun)  have  now 
to  work  upon  the  earth." 

%  The  day  =  the  time  allotted  to  Christ's  ministry  on  eartb ;  the  night,  therefore,  =  the 
Ulipraaching  end  of  his  earthly  labours. 

^  So  long  as  Christ  remained  on  earth,  he  must  remain,  according  to  his  nature,  the  Sun 
of  the  world ;  so  long,  therefore,  he  must  shed  light  around  him,  dispense  bodily  and  spir- 
itual blessings  ;  no  opportunity  of  doing  this  must  pass.  The  cure  of  this  blind  man,  bodily 
and  spiritually,  was  part  of  his  work  as  "  light  of  the  world."  Not,  indeed,  that  he  has 
ever  ceased  to  be  "  the  light  of  the  world  ;"  but  his  personal  and  visible  manifestation  was 
here  in  question;  the  Sun  of  the  world,  visible  upon  the  earth  itself 

II  Would  any  one  have  invented  this,  which  tends  to  diminish,  instead  of  magnifying  tlu- 
miracle  ?  "  But  it  was  invented  for  the  sake  of  the  mystical  allusion  to  Siloam."  'Were 
this  so,  a  longer  explanation  than  the  sentence,  '■  which  is,  hy  interpret nt ion,  'sent'  "  (v.  7), 
would  have  been  given.  If  &  tpunvsvtTai  ar,taTa\fikvoi  is  genuine,  and  a  mystical  meaning 
is  assumed,  it  is  needless  to  insist  strictly  upon  gi-ammatical  accuracy  in  the  translator, 
especially  as  the  word  HI  7^  It*,  sending  out,  could  be  applied  by  metonymy  to  one  of  th(' 

canals  from  the  spring  of  Siloam;  and  the  form  HjK/  (Neb.,  iii.,  15)  comes,  in  fact,  near 
to  this  translation.  As  has  been  said,  a  later  writer,  intending  to  give  a  mystical  inter- 
pretation, would  have  coloured  it  more  deeply.  But,  on  the  other  hajid,  if  we  do  not  arbi- 
trarilj"  assume  that  the  operations  of  the  Holy  Ghost  rudely  tore  asunder  peculiarities  that 
were  rooted  in  the  culture  of  the  people  and  the  times,  we  may  readily  imagine  that  John, 
who  eagerly  caught  at  all  allusions  to  the  object  of  his  love,  would  be  inclined  to  find  a 
mystical  and  higher  meaning  in  the  .sending  of  the  blind  man  to  wash  in  the  pool,  and 
that  the  more,  because  the  act  in  itself  was  comparatively  unimportant ;  and  that  he  thus 
made  Siloam  the  symbol  of  the  heavenly  uiro'aroXof,  by  whom  the  diseased  man  was  to  bw 
healed. 

^  John's  omission  to  mention  expressly  that  the  cure  was  gradual  does  not  militate 
against  our  view.  If  it  were  not  gradual,  we  should  have  to  supply  some  other  points 
omitted  by  the  narrative,  e.g.,  that  some  one  led  the  blind  man  to  the  pool,  or,  that  he  was 
so  accustomed  to  the  way  as  to  need  no  guidance.  Such  omissions  as  this  are  no  proof  that 
the  account  was  not  due  to  an  eye-witness ;  especially  as,  on  the  theory  that  the  account 
was  an  invention,  it  would  be  impossible  to  account  satisfactorily  for  the  mention  of  the 
subsidiarj'  features  at  all.  In  all  the  rest  of  the  narrative — the  conduct  of  the  blind  man 
•aid  of  the  Pharisees— the  stamp  of  eye-witness  is  indubitable;  and  the  want  of  minut« 


300  CHRIST  IN  JERUSALEM. 

§  199.  Attempts  of  the  Sanhedr'un  to  corriqit  and  alarm  the  restored 

Blind  Mail. —  Christ's   Conversation  with  him. —  The  Sight   of'  the 

Blind,  and  the  Blindjiess  of  the  Seeing. 

A  great  sensation  must  have  ensued  among  the  multitude  at  sight  of 
a  man  so  well  known  as  the  blind  beggar  walking  about  completely 
restored.  John  gives  a  graphic  description  (ch.  ix)  of  the  arts  em- 
ployed by  the  Sanhedrim  to  deny  or  explain  away  a  fact  which  so 
publicly  testified  to  the  power  of  Christ.  Their  craft  was  used  in  vain. 
Nothing  could  be  extorted  from  the  lips  of  the  man  or  of  his  parents 
to  further  their  designs.  The  beggar's  incorruptible  love  of  truth  was 
shown  in  his  indignation  at  their  attempts  to  explain  away  his  own 
experience  and  force  him  to  a  lie.  Their  spiritual  arrogance  was 
wounded  by  his  firmness,  and  their  rage  soon  turned  against  himself. 

His  heart  was  prepared  by  this  conflict  with  the  foes  of  Christ  to 
receive  from  the  latter  a  revelation  of  his  character.  This  was  given 
(v.  35-37)  probably  at  some  public  place  where  Jesus  found  him  ; 
and  since  he  was  already  convinced  that  the  man  who  had  cured  him 
was  endowed  with  Divine  power,  he  could  the  more  readily  recognize 
him  as  Messiah,  when  announced  by  himself  as  such. 

The  conduct  of  this  poor  man  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  Pharisees 
on  the  other,  represented  the  tendencies  of  two  opposite  classes  of 
mankind ;  and  Christ  set  this  opposition  forth  vividly  thus  :  "  For 
judgment  I  am  come  into  this  world,  that  they  which  see  not  might  see  ; 
and  that  they  ivhich  see  might  he  made  blind."  The  sjiiritual  was  here 
figured  by  the  corporeal  ;  the  blind  man  had  been  made  to  see,  while 
the  Pharisees,  who  would  not  see  the  fact  before  them,  became  blind 
with  their  eyes  open.  The  same  thing  occurred  in  a  spiritual  sense ; 
the  beggar,  sjiiritually  blinded  by  involuntary  ignorance,  but  conscious 
of  it,  humbly  accepted  the  spiritual  light  that  was  offei'ed  him,  and  be- 
came a  seeing  man.  The  Pharisees,  on  tlie  other  hand,  had  knowl- 
edge enough,  but  would  not  use  it ;  and,  in  their  pride  of  knowledge, 
shutting  out  the  Divine  light,  they  became  more  culpably  blind. 

And  this  judgment  avails  for  all  ages.  Wherever  the  Spirit  of  Christ 
operates  among  men,  the  blind  are  made  to  see,  the  seeing  become 
blind.  The  work  of  Christ,  in  enlightening  and  blessing  mankind,  can 
not  be  accomplished  without  this  "sifting;"  it  flows  necessarily  from 
the  opposite  moral  tendencies  of  men.  The  grace  and  the  condemna- 
tion go  hand  in  hand;  the  offer  of  the  one  involves  the  infliction  of  the 
other. 

The  Pharisees  who  stood  around  knew  well  that  these  words  were 
directed  against  themselves,  and  asked  him,  in  offended  pride,  "  Are 

ness  in  the  detail  of  tiic  fiict  itself  was  i)robably  caused  by  the  narrator's  hastening  from 
the  miracle  itself  to  that  in  which  he  was  most  interested,  viz.,  its  result. 


PARABLE  OF  THE  GOOD  SHEPHERD.       301 

we,  then,  hlincl  also  ?"  Christ  bad  not  said  that  they  were  blind,  but 
that  they  loould  become  so  by  their  own  guilt ;  and  he  replied  :  "  If 
ye  were  blind,  ye  should  have  no  sin  ;  but  now  ye  say,  we  see  ;  therefore 
your  sin  remainethy  (Ignorance  would  have  excused  them,  as  in  the 
case  of  the  sin  against  the  Son  of  Man.  But  their  boast  of  knowledcfe 
was  a  witness  against  themseKes.  Able  to  see,  but  not  willing,  their 
blindness  was  their  guilt.) 

§  200.  Parable  of  the  Good  Shepherd. —  The  Parable  extended. —  Christ 
the  Door. — Intimation  of  Mercy  to  the  Heathen.     (John,  x.) 

Christ  proceeded  to  characterize  the  Pharisees,  with  just  severity,  as 
false  guides  of  the  people  ;  doubtless  having  in  view  at  the  time  the 
conduct  of  the  tyrannical  hierarchs  towards  the  poor  blind  man,  and 
his  bearing,  in  turn,  towards  them.  He  first  describes  himself,  in  con- 
trast with  the  Pharisees,  as  the  genuine  and  divinely-called  leader  of 
the  people.  The  blind  man  whom  he  had  healed  was  the  representa- 
tive of  all  such  oppressed  souls  as  were  repelled  by  the  selfish  judges, 
and  drawn  to  Christ.  It  may  have  been  the  case  (although  the  sup- 
position is  not  necessary)  that  the  sight  of  a  flock  of  sheep  at  hand 
suggested  the  parabolic*  illustration  that  he  employed. 

The  thief  who  leaps  over  the  wall,  instead  of  entering  the  fbld  by 
the  door,  represents  those  who  become  teachei's  and  guides  of  the  peo- 
ple of  their  own  mere  will.  The  Shepherd,  entering  in  at  the  door, 
represents  Christ,  who  offers  himself,  divinely  called,  to  guide  seeking 
souls  to  the  kingdom  of  God.  His  voice  harmonizes  with  the  Divine 
drawing  within  them ;  they  know  it,  and  admit  him  ;  he  knows  them 
all,  and  all  their  wants.  He  goes  before  them,  and  leads  the  way  to 
the  pasture  where  their  w"ants  can  be  satisfied.  But  the  voice  of  the 
selfish  leaders  is  strange  to  them,  and  they  flee  with  repugnance  ; 
knowing  well  that  such  guides  have  other  aims  than  the  salvation  of 
the  souls  of  those  that  hear  them. 

To  present  the  thought  still  more  strikinglj',  he  extended  the  figure, 
adding  several  new  traits.t  The  first  outline  of  the  parable  simply 
contrasted  a  lawful  with  an  unlawful  entering  into  the  fold  ;  in  the  ex- 
tended form  of  it,  the  door  assumes  a  new  significance.  He  himself  is 
not  only  the  good  shepherd,  but  also  the  door  of  the  fold,  inasmuch  as 
through  him  alone  can  longing  souls  find  entrance  into  the  kingdom  of 
God.  This  very  fact,  that  he  is  at  once  both  shepherd  and  door,  dis- 
tinguishes him  from  all  other  shepherds  ;  it  is  the  peculiar  feature  of 
Christ's  teaching,  as  distinct  from  all  teachers,  that  he  is  himself  the 
revealer,  and  all  his  revelations  refer  back  to  himself;  he  can  point 

*  Cf.,  on  the  parables  of  Jolin,  p.  111. 

t  Examples  of  the  same  mode  of  extending  a  parable  are  to  be  found  iu  the  Synoptical 
Gospels. 


302  CHRIST  RETURNS  TO  GALILEE. 

out  no  other  duor  to  the  kingdom  but  himself.  He  represents  himself 
as  the  door  both  for  the  sheep  and  the  shepherds  ;  the  latter  more  prom- 
inently here.  In  the  simple  outline  of  the  parable  he  had  contrasted 
himself,  as  shepherd,  with  the  thieves  ;  he  now  further  contrasts  otlicr 
shepherds  with  the  thieves.  All  who  sought  to  gather  followers  and 
form  parties  in  the  Theocratic  community,  and,  instead  of  turning  men's 
hearts  to  Messiah,  turned  them  rather  to  themselves,  were  thieves  and 
robbers  ;  but  such  could  find  no  access  to  hearts  really  seeking  salva- 
tion. But  those  shepherds  that  enter  in  by  him  as  the  door  have  no- 
thing to  fear  ;  they  can  go  in  and  out,  and  find  pasture  for  the  sheep. 
The  true  teacher  who  leads  souls  to  Christ  will  not  only  be  saved  him- 
self, but  will  be  able  to  satisfy  the  wants  of  the  souls  intrusted  to  his 
care. 

In  this  form  of  the  parable  Christ  contrasts  himself  (as  the  shepherd 
who  alone  seeks  the  welfare  of  the  sheep)  not  only  with  the  thieves, 
but  also  with  the  hirelings.  These  two  classes  corresponded  to  two  dif- 
ferent classes  of  Pharisees,  viz.,  those  who  sacrificed  the  welfare  of 
the  people  to  their  wholly  selfish  aims ;  and  those  who,  with  better 
jfeelings,  had  not  love  enough,  and  therefore  not  courage  enough,  to  risk 
every  thing  for  the  good  of  souls.  The  latter,  afraid  of  the  jiower  of 
the  former,  gave  the  poor  people  up  to  the  power  of  the  Evil  One  (the: 
wolf,  V.  12),  to  scatter  and  divide.  Standing  between  Christ  and  the 
Sanhedrim,  this  party,  with  all  their  good  intentions,  had  neither  the 
steadiness  of  purpose  nor  the  self-sacrificing  love  which  were  needed 
in  such  a  position.  In  contrast  with  such,  Christ  declares,  "  /  am  tin- 
good  shepherd,  and  hnotv  viy  sheep,  and  am  knoivn  of  mine  (thus  beto- 
kening the  inward  sympathy  between  himself  and  those  that  belonged 
to  him  by  the  Divine  drawing  vvitliin  them),  and  I  lay  down  my  life 
for  the  shcej).^''  , 

With  this  view  of  his  coming  self-sacrifice  for  the  salvation  of  men 
before  him,  his  eye  glances  forward  to  the  greater  developement  of  his 
work  that  was  to  follow  that  sacrifice,  and  there  he  sees  "  other  sheep, 
not  of  this  foW — souls  ready  for  the  kingdom  among  other  nations, 
who  were  also  to  have  their  place  before  its  consummation :  "  Them, 
also,  I  must  bring,  and  they  shall  hear  my  voice  ;  and  there  shall  he  one 
fold  and  one  shepherd.''^ 

§  201.  Divisions  among  the  People. —  Christ's  return  into  Galilee. 

The  worldly-minded  and  fanatical  portion  of  the  people  were  inca- 
pable of  understanding  these  words  of  Christ ;  instead  of  inspiration 
they  saw  nothing  but  extravagance.  But  others  were  irresistibly  at- 
tracted ;  words,  such  as  no  other  could  utter,  seemed  to  them  in  perfect 
harmony  with  works,  such  as  no  other  could  do.     New  divisions  arose, 


CAPERNAU3I.  303 

and   the  power  of  the  Sanhedrim,  of  course,  was  upon  the  side  of 
Christ's  enemies. 

The  life  of  Jesus  was  more  and  more  endangered  every  day  at  Je- 
rusalem, and  his  ministry  more  and  more  disturbed.  He,  therefore, 
withdrew  from  the  meti'opolis  and  returned  to  Capernaum,  now,  in- 
deed, for  the  last  time* 


CHxlPTER  XIl. 

CHRIST^S  RETURN  FROM  CAPERNAUM  TO  JERUSALEM  THROUGH 

SAMARIA. 

§  202.  Reasons  for  the  Journey  through  Samaria.     (Luke,  ix.,  51,  seq.) 

AFTER  a  short  abode  at  Capernaum  Christ  determined  to  take  a 
final  leave  of  that  place,  so  long  the  centre  of  his  labours.     He 

*  From  the  statements  of  John,  taken  alone,  we  should  mfer  that  Christ  did  not  leave 
the  city  immediately  after  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  but  remained  until  that  of  the  Dedi- 
cation. It  is  true  that  John  does  not  expressly  say  (x.,  22)  that  he  remained,  which  devi- 
ation from  the  ordinary  rule  we  might  expect  him  to  have  mentioned  ;  but  this  omission 
can  be  explained  more  readily  than  the  omission  of  the  journey  back  to  Galilee.  More- 
over, it  would  be  easier  to  trace  the  connexion  of  the  history  by  supposing-  the  previous 
jomniey  to  have  been  the  last,  than  by  admitting  the  one  adopted  in  oar  text  (chap.  xi.). 
The  course  of  prepai-ation  for  his  death  to  which  he  subjected  his  disciples  (as  already  re- 
lated) would  suit  much  better  to  this  hypothesis,  as  taking  place  just  before  the  last  jonr- 
ney  than  before  the  next  to  the  last. 

Thus  far  we  agree  with  B.  Jacohi  (Dissertation  on  the  Chronology  of  the  Life  of  Jesus, 
before  cited).  But  we  learn  from  Luke,  ix.,  51,  that  Jesus  made  his  last  journey  through 
Samaria  ;  that  he  travelled  slowly,  in  order  to  scatter  the  seeds  of  the  kingdom  in  the 
towns  and  villages  as  he  passed,  and  to  make  wholesome  impressions  upon  the  people. 
Against  John's  testimon)/  such  an  authority  as  this  woald  not  avail ;  and  it  may  be  admitted, 
too,  that  the  accounts  of  tii-o  journeys  are  blended  together  in  it,  with  other  foreign  matter; 
Cf.  Luke,  xiii.,  22 ;  xvii.,  11,  in  which  passages  a  beginning  is  made  towards  accounts  of 
ttro  journeys,  though  thej',  perhaps,  refer  to  the  same  one.  But  it  is  clear,  in  any  case, 
that  many  things  recited  here  must  belong  to  a  last  journey;  for  instance,  xiii.,  31-33. 
Now  it  cannot  be  for  a  moment  supposed  that  this  journey,  so  described,  was  the  one  that 
Christ  took  in  order  to  attend  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  (Jolm,  viii.,  2,  seq.) ;  for  John  tells 
us  that  in  that  case  he  remained  behind  the  rest,  and,  avoiding  all  publicity,  came  into  the 
city  unexpectedly  after  the  feast  had  gone  on  for  some  days ;  all  utterly  in  conflict  with 
Lake's  account  of  the  journey  through  Samaria.  Nor  is  it  internally  probable  that  Christ 
would  have  remained  in  the  city  after  the  feast  at  a  time  when  his  labours  must  have  suf- 
fered so  many  hindrances  from  the  persecutions  of  the  Pharisees  ;  the  last  period  of  his 
stay  on  earth  was  to  be  more  actively  employed.  Nor  does  this  view  of  the  case  contra- 
dict John's  statements  ;  it  only  presupposes  a  blank  necessary  to  be  filled. 

W'"e  have  tlius  drawn  attention  to  the  arguments  advanced  on  both  sides ;  not  intending, 
however,  to  preclude  further  inquii-y  of  our  own.  Cannot  John's  statement,  that  Jesus 
went  up  to  the  feast  "  not  openly,  but,  as  it  were,  in,  secret"  (vii.,  10),  be  explained  by  sup- 
posing that  he  did  not  take  the  usual  caravan  road,  nor  journey  with  a  caravan,  but  took 
an  unusual  route  through  Samaria,  a  province  that  held  no  connexion  whatever  with 
Judea?  May  not  his  late  arrival  at  Jerusalem,  in  the  middle  of  the  feast,  be  explained  on 
the  ground  that  he  intentionally  took  the  longer  route  ?  Admitting  this,  it  will  be  easy 
(as  Krabhe  and  Wiesclcr  allow)  to  reconcile  John's  account  with  Lukes. 


304  RETURN  THROUGH  S ARMARIA. 

wished  to  visit  Jerusalem  asrain  at  the  Feast  of  the  Dedication,  which 
occuiTed  towards  the  end  of  December.  Many  had  believed  on  him 
during  his  last  stay  in  the  city,  and  he  had  been  compelled  to  leave 
them  to  the  arts  of  the  hierarchy  ;  it  was  now  necessary  to  strengthen 
and  confirm  their  faith  by  his  personal  presence.  He  chose  to  make 
this  journey  by  way  of  Samaria,  rather  than  through  Peraea,  in  order 
to  scatter  the  seed  of  truth  as  widely  as  possible  among  the  towns  and 
villages  on  the  road,  A  longer  time  than  ordinary  was,  therefore,  re- 
quired for  the  journey  ;  and  he  left  Capernaum  sooner  than  was  abso- 
lutely necessary  had  he  intended  to  go  directly  to  Jerusalem.' 

§  203.    CJioice  of  the  Seventy.       (Luke,  x.) — Import  of  the  Numhcr 

"  Seventy.'^ 

The  prospect  of  the  spread  of  the  Gospel  among  all  nations,  after 
his  own  sufferings  should  have  prepared  its  way,  lay  before  him  as  he 
left  Capernaum  never  to  return  ;  and  he  said  to  his  disciples,  in  view 
of  so  vast  a  work,  in  which,  as  yet,  there  were  so  few  labourers,  "T//e 
harvest,  truly,  is  great,  but  the  labourers  are  few  ;  pray  ye,  therefore,  the 
Lord  of  the  harvest  that  he  would  send  forth  labourers  into  his  harvest  ^^ 
He  then  chose  a  number  of  his  followers  as  his  special  and  devoted  or- 
gans for  proclaiming  the  kingdom,  and  sent  them  before  to  announce 
and  explain  his  coming,  and  prepare  the  minds  of  the  people,  that  the 
short  time  of  his  visits  among  them  might  be  more  successfully  em- 
ployed. 

Some  definite  number  of  disciples  had  to  be  selected,  and  he  chose 
{as  in  the  selection  of  the  Twelve,  p.  116)  a  number  at  that  time  in 
common  currency.  The  round  number  seventy  may  have  had  general 
reference  either  to  the  seventy  elders,  or  to  the  seventy  members  of 
the  Great  Sanhedrim  ;  or  it  may  have  had  special  reference  to  the 
opinion  prevalent  among  the  Jewish  theologians  that  there  were  sev- 
enty languages  and  nations  upon  the  face  of  the  earth.  If  this  last 
were  tlie  case,  it  was  an  instance  oi formal  accommodation.  Without 
confirming  this  opinion,  Christ  might  have  employed  seventy  to  indi- 
cate symbolically  that  his  organs  were  not  to  reach  the  Jewish  people 
only,  but  all  the  nations  of  the  earth.* 

*  TIfe  fact  that  Luke  alone  mentions  tlie  cliuicc  of  the  Seventy  is  no  reason  for  question- 
ing the  accoant.  We  attach  no  importance  to  the  narratives  in  re^'^anl  to  the  Seventy 
current  in  the  first  centuries  (as  in  the  account  (mixed  up  witli  legends)  of  the  conversion 
of  King  Abgarus,  written  in  Syriac,  and  kept  in  the  archives  at  Edcssa  (Eus.,  Eccl.  Hist., 
i.,  13) ;  and  in  the  fifth  book  of  the  Hypotyposes  of  Clement  of  Alexandria  (Eus.,  i.,  I'J), 
which  also  contains  evident  falsehoods)  as  confiniiatory  of  Luke's  statement.  But  its 
perfect  aptness  in  the  historical  connexion,  and  the  entire  and  characteristic  coherency  of 
every  thing  spoken  by  Christ,  according  to  Luke,  with  the  circumstances  (so  superior  to  the 
collocation  in  Matthew),  strengthen  the  argument  in  its  favour.  How  appropriate  is  the 
language  of  Luke,  x.,  2,  in  view  of  the  approaching  new  developement  of  the  kingdom  of 
God ;  whereas  in  Matthew  (ix.,  37,  38)  the  same  words  are  comiccted  with  the  account 


INSTRUCTIONS  TO  THE  SEVENTY.  305 

§  204.  Instructions  to  the  Seventy  on  their  Mission.  (Luke,  x.)  The 
Wo  to  the  Unbelieving  Cities. 

The  Spirit  of  Cln-ist,  and  of  the  communion  which  he  founded  and 
mspired,  demanded  that  his  organs  should  not  labour  as  isolated  instru- 
ments, but  in  union  with  each  other,  reciprocally  assisting  each  other; 
just  as  he  promised,  "  Where  tivo  or  three  are  gathered  together  in  my 
name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  thcm.'^  Therefore,  in  sending  out  his 
disciples  in  various  directions  before  him,  he  sent  them  not  singly,  but 
two  and  two. 

The  instructions  given  to  them  were  similar  to  those  which  he  had 
previously  impressed  upon  the  Twelve;*  but,  as  the  opposition  of  the 
Pharisees  had  greatly  increased  in  violence,  he  foretold  that  they  would 
meet  with  many  enemies  :  "  I  send  you  forth  as  lambs  among  wolves'' 
This  may  either  imply  that  they  were  to  go  forth  defenceless  among 
the  most  fierce  and  cruel  foes ;  or  because  the  Pharisees,  as  selfish 
leaders  who  sacrificed  the  welfare  of  their  flocks,  were  loolves  in  sheep's 
clothing,  the  disciples  were  contrasted  with  them  as  lambs  in  innocence 
r-i  heart  and  gentleness.  Or  both  thoughts  together  may  have  been  in- 
tended. But  unfavourable  as  was  the  field  of  their  labour,  he  bade 
them  take  no  uneasy  care  for  the  future,  and  to  trust  confidently  that 
all  their  wants  would  be  supplied.  They  were  told,  as  the  Apostles 
had  been  (ix.,  3),  to  "carry  neither  purse,  nor  scrip,  nor  shoes ;"  but 
with  the  view,  in  addition  to  the  trust  in  Providence,  which  the  rule 
implied  in  both  cases,  to  expedite  their  journey,  as  its  immediate  ob- 
jects required  haste  :   ["  Salute  no  man  by  the  way."] 

of  the  preaching  in  Galilee  and  the  choice  of  the  Twelve  Apostles.  So,  in  Matt.,  x.,  the 
continuation  of  Christ's  discourse  to  the  Seventy  (as  given  in  Luke,  x.)  is  connected  with 
the  Tiiyelve.  with  many  passages  that  must  have  been  addressed  to  the  Apostles  at  a  later 
and  more  hostile'period.  In  Luke,  the  instmctions  to  the  Seventy  are  distinguished  from 
those  to  the  Twelve  in  this,  that  the  former  contain  allusions  to  the  difficulties  in  which 
the  missionaries  would  be  involved  ;  but  no  definite  references  to  the  subsequent  mission 
of  the  disciples  to  the  heathen.  The  rebukes  of  Chorazim,  Capernaum,  etc.,  suit  exactly 
to  the  time  when  Christ  was  taking  his  final  leave  of  the  neighbourhood  which  had  been 
the  centre  of  his  labours,  and  so  Luke  assigns  them ;  but  in  Matt.,  xi.,  tbey  are  given  in 
connexion  with  the  reply  to  John  Baptist's  messengers. 

It  is  clear  that  Christ  called  upon  otJiers  than  the  Twelve  to  join  themselves  closely  to 
him ;  and  we  find  that,  after  he  left  the  earth,  others  did.  belong  to  the  nan-ower  circle  of 
the  disciples.  All  this  indicates  that  such  a  circle  was  formed  by  liiniBelf ;  for  the  ivhole  num- 
ber of  disciples  must  have  amounted  not  only  to  120  (Acts,  i.,  15),  but  to  500  (1  Cor.,  xv.,  6). 

But  it  may  be  said  [as  it  has  been]  that  this  story  of  the  definite  number  seventy  was 
invented  at  a  later  period.  Even  if  this  were  so,  it  would  not  discredit  Luke's  statemcTit, 
so  precisely  fitting  to  the  history,  of  the  way  in  which  the  circle  was  foi-med.  But  there 
is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  Christ,  who  was  accustomed  to  adopt  and  use  existing  forms, 
should  not  have  appropriated  such  a  ozie  as  this  in  forming  the  second  narrower  circle  of 
disciples. 

*  That  is,  indeed,  an  aiTogaiit  and  presumptuous  criticism  which  decides  that  the  whole 
account  of  the  mission  of  the  Seventy  is  a  mere  imitation  of  that  of  the  Twelve,  simply 
because  the  two  sets  of  instructions  are  not  accurately  distinguished  from  each  other 

u 


306  RETURN  THROUGH  SAMARIA. 

After  declaring  to  them  (v.  5-12)  that  the  destiny  of  the  towns  into 
which  they  entered  would  be  fixed  by  the  reception  they  gave  to  tlie 
preaching  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  Christ  pronounced  a  wo  upon  tho.-o 
towns  of  Galilee*  which  had  been  so  greatly  favoured  by  his  labours, 
and  had  (the  little  flock  of  believers  excepted)  given  them  so  unworthy 
a  reception.  "  Had  such  miraclest  been  wrought  in  Tyre  and  Sidnn, 
they  had  a  long  while  ago  repented.  And  thou,  Capernaum,  which 
art  exalted  to  heaven,  shalt  be  cast  down  to  Hades."J  The  higher  one 
may  rise  by  rightly  using  the  grace  bestowed  upon  him,  the  deeper  will 
be  his  fall  if  he  neglects  it.  He  who  was  the  humblest  of  men  here 
betokened  himself  as  one  whose  ministry  in  a  city  could  exalt  it  to  heav- 
en; and  in  the  mouth  of  any  other  the  expression  would  have  been 
the  height  of  arrogance.  Vainly,  indeed,  do  some  attempt  to  flatten 
down  this  language  of  Chiist's  into  Oriental  liyperhole  ;  an  attempt,  too, 
which  is  utterly  unjustifiable  in  regard  to  his  language,  in  which  the 
fio-ures  of  the  East  were  so  imbued  with  the  sobriety  of  the  West  as  to 
stamp  them  with  fitness  for  all  times  and  all  countries. 

§  205.   Exultation  of  the  Disciples  on  their  Return. —  The   Overthroiv 

of  Satan  s  Kingdom. —  Christ  warns  the  Disciples  against  Vanity. 

(Luke,  X.,  17-20.) 

When  the  disciples,  at  a  later  period,  returned  from  their  mission  to 
meet  Christ,  they  related  to  him  with  child-like  joy§  the  great  things 
they  had  achieved  in  his  name  :  "  Ercn  the  devils  arc  subject  to  us  in 
thy  name." 

As  Christ  had  previously  designated  the  cure  of  demoniacs  wrought 
by  himself  as  a  sign  that  the  kingdom  of  God  had  come  upon  tlie 
earth, II  so  now  he  considered  what  the  disciples  reported  as  a  token  of 
the  conquering  power  of  that  kingdom,  before  which  every  evil  thing 
must  yield:  "•  I  beheldS\  Satan  as  lightnirig  fall  from  heaven;'^  i.  e., 

*  Many  miracles  are  here  presupposed  as  wrought  in  Western  Bethsaida  and  in  the 
neighbouring  and  obscure  village,  Chorazin,  which  have  not  been  transmitted  to  us. 

t  Such  sayings  from  Christ's  own  lips  prove  that  ho  lumsclf  was  conscious  of  performing 
acts  out  of  the  ordinary  course  of  the  material  world,  by  which  even  the  dullest  might  have 
been  awakened  had  they  possessed  proper  reliirious  susceptibilities  ;  as,  indeed,  witlioiit 
these,  the  stimulus  of  miracles  could  have  been  but  transient. 

\  The  word  v'pwOetca  (v.  15)  may  be  understood  ob.iectively  or  subjectively.  In  the  first 
sense,  it  would  imply  that  the  town  was  exalted  by  the  lot  which  had  fallen  to  it ;  certainly 
not  in  reference  to  worldly  wealth,  although  it  was  a  prosperous  place  ;  but  to  the  presoncf 
and  the  ministry  of  Christ  which  it  had  enjoyed.  Taken  subjectively,  it  would  refer  to  Ihe 
arrogance  of  the  citj',  as  preventing  it  from  rightly  appreciating  the  grace  which  had  bci  ii 
bestowed  upon  it.    The  connexion  favours  the  first. 

$  This  does  not  seem  to  me  to  justify  De  Wclte's  conclusion  that  Christ  had  not  as  yet 
conferred  on  them  the  same  powers  as  on  the  Apostles.  Even  in  possession  of  this  power, 
they  might  have  been  surprised,  conscious  of  what  they  were,  to  find  such  great  thinirs 
done  by  tliem  ;  just  as  in  other  cases,  a  man  who,  while  conscious  of  his  own  weakness, 
serves  as  an  organ  for  the  objectively  Divine,  may  be  surprised  at  what  he  docs,  in  com 
parison  with  what  he  is.  II  Cf  p.  150. 

11  Beholding  in  the  spirit  is  here  undoubtedly  meant ;  Christ  designates  by  a  sjtnbolicaJ 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD.  307 

from  the  pinnacle  of  power  which  he  had  thus  far  held  among  men. 
Before  the  intuitive  glance  of  his  spirit  lay  open  the  results  which  were 
to  flow  from  his  redemptive  work  after  his  ascension  into  heaven  ;  he 
saw,  in  spirit,  the  kingdom  of  God  advancing  in  triumph  over  the  kin"-- 
dom  of  Satan.  He  does  not  say  "  I  see  n6w,"  but  "  J  saw.'"  He  smv 
it  before  the  disciples  brought  the  report  of  their  accomplished  won- 
ders. While  they  were  doing  these  isolated  works,  he  saw  the  one 
great  work — of  which  theirs  were  only  particular  and  individual  signs 
— the  victory  over  the  mighty  power  of  evil  which  had  ruled  mankind,* 
completely  achieved.  And,  therefore  (v.  19),  he  promised,  in  conse- 
quence of  this  general  victory,  that  in  their  coming  labours  they  should 
do  still  greater  things.  They  were  to  trample  the  power  of  the  enemy 
under  foot ;  they  were  to  walk  unharmed  over  every  obstacle  that  op- 
posed the  kingdom  of  God. 

Biit  at  the  same  time  he  wai-ned  them  against  a  tendency,  dangerous 
to  their  ministry,  which  might  possibly  attach  to  their  joy  at  its  brilliant 
and  extraordinary  results.  "Notwithstanding,  in  this  rejoice  not,  that 
tlie  spirits  are  subject  unto  you."  They, were  liable  to  vanity,  glorying 
in  the  means,  viz.,  the  individual  brilliant  results  of  their  ministry,  rath- 
er than  in  the  Divine  end,  the  triumph  of  the  kingdom,  to  which  all 
single  results  were  but  subsidiary  elements;  a  vanity  which  might  de- 
ceive itself,  and  take  the  appearance  for  the  reality.  And  many  great 
and  successful  labourers  have  yielded  to  this  temptation  ;  their  very 
works  becoming  the  means  of  corrupting  their  inlferior  life;  and  this 
having  become  impure,  the  imparity  passes  over  into  their  works  also. 
"  But  rather  rejoice  that  your  names  are  written  in  heaven."  They  were 
to  do  wonderful  works  in  the  future ;  but  these  were  not  to  be  the 
source  of  their  joy ;  the  kingdom  of  God,  the  aim  of  all  their  labours, 
was  to  be  the  object  of  their  rejoicing :  and  all  else  subordinate  to  it. 
"  Your  great  deeds  are  to  be  as  nothing  in  comparison  to  the  grace 
given  you,  the  pardon  of  your  sins,  and  life  everlasting." 

§  206.    The  Kingdom  of  God  revealed  to  Babes. —  The  Blessedness  of 

the  Disciples  in  beholding  it.     (Luke,  x.,  21,  24.) 

Thus  piercing  the  future,  and  saeing  that  these  simple,  child-like 

men,  who  had  nothing  but  what  was  given  them,  were  to  be  organs  of 

figure  what  the  glance  of  his  Spirit  foresaw  in  the  progress  of  the  future.  There  is  no 
reason  to  suppose  here  a  vision  hke  that  of  the  prophets,  in  which  the  truth  was  pre- 
sented in  a  symbolical  veil  or  covering.  Nowhere  in  the  history  of  Christ  do  we  find  an 
intuition  in  the  form  of  a  vision ;  indeed,  such  seem  to  have  been  precluded  by  the  proper 
indwelling  of  God  in  Him,  distinguishing  him  from  all  prophets  to  whom  a  transient  Di- 
vine illumination  is  imparted  ;  in  Him  the  Divine  and  the  Human  were  completely  one ; 
in  Him  was  shown  the  calmness,  clearness,  and  steadiness  of  a  mind  bearing  within  itself 
the  source  of  Divine  light;  in  His  unbroken  consciousness  as  God-Man,  we  dare  not  distin- 
guish moments  of  light  and  moments  of  darkness.  *  Cf.  John,  xii..  31. 


308  RETURN  THROUGH  SAMARTA. 

the  poAvcr  of  God  to  renovate  Immanity,  that  by  their  preaching  men 
were  to  learn  what  human  wisdom  could  never  have  discovered,  he 
poured  forth  the  holy  joy  of  his  heart  before  God  in  fervent  thankful- 
ness:  ^''  I  thank  thee,  O  Father,  Lord  of  heaven  and  earth,*  that  thou 
hast  hid  these  things  from  the  wise  and  j)rudenty  and  hast  revealed  them 
unto  habes  :\  even  so.  Father  ;  for  so  it  seemed  good  in  thy  sight. \  All 
things  are  delivered  to  me  of  my  Father  ;\  and  no  man  hnoweth  who  the 
Son  is\\  (the  true  nature  of  the  Son)  hut  the  Father  ;  and  who  the  Fa- 
ther is,  but  the  Soti,  and  he  to  whom  the  Son  toill  reveal  7iim."*[\ 

After  he  had  thus  poured  out  his  soul  before  God,  he  turned  to  his 
disciples,  and  pronounced  them  blessed,  because  their  eyes  had  beheld 
that  which  the  prophets  and  the  pious  had  waited  and  longed  for.** 

The  "  seeing"  and  "  hearing"  are  not  to  be  taken,  as  Hugo  h  St. 
Victor  long  ago  remarked,  in  an  outward  sense,  but  spiritually,  with 
reference  to  the  truth  revealed  to  them,  which  had  been  veiled  and,  to 
some  extent,  hidden  from  those  who  occupied  even  the  highest  place  in 

*  The  Omnipotent  Creator,  who  manifests  himself  as  Father  in  condescending  to  the 
wants  of  men,  and  in  Ivis  self-revealing  love. 

t  The  hiding  from  the  wise  and  the  revealing  unto  babes  are  closely  connected  to 
gether;  it  required  child-like  submission  and  devotion  to  receive  the  communications  of  the 
higher  source,  and  therefore  none  could  receive  it  but  such  as,  like  children,  in  need  of 
higher  light,  yielded  themselves  up  to  the  Divine  illumination ;  and  for  the  same  reason, 
those  whose  imagined  wisdom  satisfied  them,  because  they  were  devoid  of  child-like  sub- 
mission, could  not  receive  the  Divine  communications. 

X  I  think  that  t^o/joXo)  ui>a(  is  not  to  be  repeated  after  vai  in  v.  21  ;  the  latter  (like  qm'/'  ) 
is  a  confirmation  of  the  preceding  passage,  and  a  reason  is  assigned-^"  so  it  seemed  good 
in  thy  sight;"  a  higher  necessity,  viz.,  the  pleasure  of  God,  made  it  so.  These  words 
form  the  point  of  transition  to  the  following  vei-se,  which  contains  the  ground  of  the  prece- 
ding ;  viz.,  that  the  Sou  receives  all  by  communication  from  God,  but  none  can  know  the 
Son  except  it  be  revealed  to  him  by  the  Father. 

6  That  is,  according  to  the  connexion,  all  power  to  carry  on  and  develope  the  kingdom 
of  God  victoriously,  and  to  give  eternal  life  to  believers  (John,  xvii.,  2).  Christ  had  pre- 
viously said  that  the  Divine  power  given  to  him  should  show  itself  in  the  efficiency  of  his 
organs  in  spreading  the  kingdom  of  God. 

II  For  this  mighty  power  was  granted  to  him  in  view  of  his  original  relations  to  God. 

TT  This  entire  passage,  which  in  Luke  connectg  itself  so  naturally  and  closely  with  the 
narrative,  is  placed  by  Matthew  (xi.,  25-27)  in  connexion  with  the  woes  pronounced  upon 
the  unbelieving  towns  of  Galilee. 

**  The  passage  in  v.  23,  24,  fonns  au  apt  and  fitting  conclusion  to  what  had  gone  before, 
both  in  form  and  substance.  The  tar'  iiiav  fits  with  the  supposition  that  the  disciples,  on  their 
return,  found  Christ  surrounded  by  one  of  those  groups  that  frefjueuth' gathered  about  him. 
The  same  words  stand,  also,  in  a  clear  connexion  in  Matt,  (xiii.,  16,  17),  but  not  so  close  as 
Luke's.  Even  the /'.>/■/»  of  the  words  is  closely  adapted  to  the  occasion  and  the  context. 
It  is  a  question  whether  the  words  "kings"  or  "righteous  men"  (as  Matt,  gives  it)  were 
the  original  one.  The  exchange  may  have  taken  place  because  "kings"'  appeared  foreign  ; 
or  vice  versa,  because  "righteous  men"  appeared  too  indefinite.  By  the  word  "kings," 
then,  we  must  understand  "  the  pious  kings  ;"  and  the  instance  of  a  David  might  have  led 
Jesus  to  connect  "kings"  with  "prophets."  Thus  the  apparently  insignificant  disciples 
are  contrasteil  with  men  of  the  highest  importance  in  the  developement  of  the  Theocracy. 
There  is  no  difficulty  in  supjiosing  that  Christ  passed  overfronv"  proplicts"  to  "righteous 
men,"  and  then  the  adjective  "  many"  (Matt.,  xiii.,  17)  would  be  the  more  appliuable. 


SIGNS  OF  DISCIPLESIIIP.  309 

the  Old  Dispensation.     A  conscious  or  unconscious  longing  for  the  fu- 
ture revelation  was  their  highest  attainment. 

§  207,  The  Signs  of' Disciples/iij?.  (Matt.,  vii.,  22.) — Requisites,  viz.: 
Self-Denial  and  Resignation  (Luke,  ix.,  56,  62)  :  Taking  up  the 
Cross.  (Luke,  xiv.,  25-35  ;  Matt.,  x.,  38  ;  xvi.,  24.) 
"If  we  were  correct  in  our  remarks  upon  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount, 
p.  237,  we  must  assign  to  this  period  the  following  words  of  Christ 
(Matt.,  vii.,  22  )  :  '■^Many  will  say  to  vie  in  that  day,  Loi'd,  Lord,  have 
we  not  prophesied  in  thy  name .?  and  in  thy  name  have  cast  out  dev- 
ils ?  a?id  in  thy  name  done  many  wonderful  works  ?  And  then  will  I 
profess  unto  them,  I  never  knew  you  ;  depart  from  me,  ye  that  work  ini- 
quity."* Words  referring  to  that  period  in  which  Chi'ist  had  already 
imparted  miraculous  powers  to  the  disciples,  and  had  to  warn  them 
against  the  danger  of  losing  sight  of  the  sole  object  of  their  works,  in 
the  splendour  and  notoriety  of  the  works  themselves.  Christ  then,  with 
his  piercing  glance  into  the  future,  announces  that  not  the  doing  "great 
works  in  his  name,  but  holy  dispositions  and  aims  alone,  would  be  an 
infallible  sign  of  discipleship.  He,  who  recognized  as  his  own  such  as 
gave  a  cup  of  cold  water  to  the  least  in  his  name,  repulsed,  as  aliens, 
those  who  pretended  to  do  great  works  in  his  name  ;  the  disposition 
shown  in  their  lives  made  it  manifest  that,  although  his  name  was  upon 
their  lips,  it  was  not  in  their  hearts.  To  such,  also,  might  be  applied 
his  saying,  "  He  that  is  tiot  ivith  me  is  against  me." 

An  attempt  at  a  nearer  definition  of  the  relation  in  which  such  persons 
and  their  works  stood  to  Christ  may  be  made  as  follows  :  They  were 
perhaps  really,  at  first,  in  communion  with  him,  and  thus  participated 
in  the  Divine  life  from  which  these  miraculous  powers  went  forth ;  but 
afterward — rejoicing  more  that  they  were  able  to  cast  out  devils  than 
that  their  names  were  written  in  the  Book  of  Life — their  very  works  be- 
came a  snare  to  destroy  them,  and  their  higher  life  was  lost  in  outward 
appearance.  After  the  principle  of  life  was  gone,  single  and  separate 
impulses  may  yet  have  remained.  Isolated  efforts  may  continue  after 
the  prime  cause  is  destroyed ;  there  may  be  life-like  convulsions  when 
life  has  departed  forever.  Compare  what  Paul  says  in  1  Cor.,  xiii., 
1-3,  about  such  separate  good  deeds  when  uninspired  by  the  life  of 
love. 

It  may  be  objected,  however,  that  Christ  betokens  these  as  persons 
whom  he  had  never  known  as  his  own.  As  such,  we  must  believe  that 
the  new  birth  had  never  been  fully  realized  in  them;  that  they  had 

*  There  is  ioterual  proof  that  this  passage  was  not  (as  some  suppose)  ascribed  to  Christ 
as  a  post  facliini  prediction.  Those  who  suppose  this  must  conceive  that  the  passage 
was  invented  to  oppose  the  heretics,  who  boasted  of  miraculous  powers.  But  in  that  case 
false  doclririe  would  have  been  made  more  prominent  than  bad  actions  ;  and  even  the  ap- 
pearance of  recogiuzing  their  works  as  real  miracles  would  have  been  avoided. 


310  RETURN  THROUGH  SAMARIA. 

been  predominantly  selfish  fi-om  the  fii'st;  that  none  but  isolated  impul- 
ses of  the  higher  life,  mere  exaltations  of  the  natural  feelings  or  imagin- 
ation, had  ever  found  place  in  them.  We  must  remember  well  that 
stimulated  natural  powers  may  do  many  things  apparently  resembling 
the  work  of  Divine  power,  but,  in  fact,  very  different  from  it. 

Many  persons,  in  the  places  to  which  Christ  came,  were  so  pow^- 
fully  affected  by  his  preaching  as  to  wish  earnestly  to  attach  them- 
selves to  him  forever;  but  he  did  not  receive  all.  Some,  carried  away 
by  transient  emotions,  felt  willing  to  promise  more  than  they  could 
perform;  and  he  took  jDains  to  lay  before  such  the  sufferings  and  strug- 
gles they  must  undergo  as  his  followers,  the  sacrifices  and  self-denial 
which  devotion  to  him  must  cost. 

One  of  these,  who  probably  went  with  him  a  little  distance  from  a 
village  where  he  had  stayed  a  short  time,*  said  unto  him,  "  Lord,  1 
will  folloio  thee  whithersoever  thou  goestT  Christ  bade  him  reflect 
well  before  taking  such  a  step  :  "  Foxes  have  holes,  and  the  birds  of  the 
air  have  nests,  hut  the  Son  of  Man  hath  not  xvhere  to  lay  his  head  ;"  ex- 
pressing the  privations  and  necessities  to  which  all  who  followed  him 
thereafter  would  expose  themselves.  Another  whom  he  invited  to  fol- 
low him,  as  he  was  about  departing,  said,  "  Suffer  me  first  to  go  and 
hicry  my  father.'"'  Under  other  circumstances  Christ  would  not  have 
hindered  the  indulgence  of  such  a  filial  love  ;  but  he  made  use  of  this 
case  to  show,  by  a  striking  example,  that  those  who  sought  to  follow 
him  must  deny  natural  feelings  that  were  otherwise  entirely  sacred, 
when  the  interests  of  the  kingdom  of  God  required  it.  "  Let  the  dead 
bury  their  dead,  hut  go  thou  and  preach  the  kingdom  of  God.^^  (Let 
those  who  are  themselves  dead,  who  know  nothing  of  the  higher  inter- 
ests of  the  kingdom  of  God  or  the  Divine  life,  attend  to  the  lifeless 
clay.  But  thou,  upon  whom  the  Divine  life,  which  conquers  all  death, 
is  opened,  thou  must  devote  thyself  wholly  to  propagate  it  by  preach 
ing  the  Gospel.  It  is  for  the  dead  to  care  for  the  dead;  the  living  f(*r 
the  living.)  So  in  answer  to  another,  who  said,  "  Let  me  first  go  and 
bid  them  farewell  ichich  are  at  home  at  my  house^''  Christ  expressed  a 
similar  thought :  "  No  one  having  put  his  hand  to  the  plough,  and  look- 
ing back,  is  fit  for  the  kingdom  of  God"]  (no  one  can  become  a  prop- 
er organ  of  the  kingdom  who  does  not  give  himself  up  to  it  with 
undivided  soul,  suffering  no  earthly  cares  to  distract  him). 

At  a  certain  point  of  this  journey,  whole  hosts  of  people,  attracted 
by  Christ's  appearance  and  preaching,  followed  after  him  (Luke,  xiv., 

*  If  stress  is  to  be  laid  upon  Luke,  ix.,  56,  57,  these  little  narratives,  wiiicli  lit  so  aptly 
to  this  part  of  the  history,  stand  in  a  much  clearer  chronological  and  pragmatical  connexion 
in  Luke,  ix.,  than  in  Matt.,  viii. 

t  Wetstcin  adduces,  m  illustration  of  this  passage,  the  beautiful  Pythagorean  sentimeot 
of  Simplicius,  in  liis  Commentary  on  Epictetus:  di  to  'Upov  i-^cp\6niiui  yiii  hiarpcipoxi. 


SELF-DENIAL.  311 

25).  He  took  pains  to  impress  upon  the  minds  of  this  multitude  the 
necessary  conditions  of  fellowship  with  him  ;  that  they  were  not  to  ex- 
pect the  appearance  of  Messiah's  kingdom  in  its  glory  upon  the  earth, 
and,  therefore,  to  look  for  nothing  but  ease  and  enjoyment  in  his  com- 
munion ;  nay,  on  the  other  hand,  said  he,  "  Ifuny  man  come  to  me,  and 
hate,  not  Jiis  father  and  mother,  d^r.,  yea,  and  his  own  life  also,  he  cannot 
he  my  disciple.^'  (The  nearest  and  dearest  earthly  ties  must  not  stand 
in  the  way  of  the  kingdom  of  God.)  "  And  whosoever  doth  not  bear 
his  cross,  and  come  after  me,  caiinot  he  my  disciple^*  (As  Christ,  con- 
demned to  death  upcfti  the  cross,  must  himself  carry  the  instrument  of 
his  sufferings  and  ignominy,  so  his  true  followers  must  be  pi'epared  to 
undergo,  of  their  own  accord,  all  sufferings  and  shame.) 

§  208.   Self  Denial  and  Self-Sacrif.ee  further  illustrated. — Parable  of 
the  building  of  the   Tower. — Of  the  Warring  King.      (Luke,  xiv., 
28-33.)— T/^e  Sacrificial  Salt.     (Mark,  ix.,  49,  50.)  — The  Treasure 
hid  in  the  Field. —  The  Pearl  of  Great  Price.     (Matt.,  xiii.,  44-46.) 
Christ  then  made  use  of  various  comparisons  to  set  still  more  clearly 
before  his  hearers  the  necessity  of  counting  the  cost,  of  fairly  contem- 
plating the  sacrifices  and  self-denial  which  his  service  required,  before 
entering  upon  it.     Those  who  heedlessly  neglected  this,  and  are  after- 
ward disgraced  by  shrinking  from  the  sacrifices  demanded  of  them, 
are  compared  to  a  man  that  sets  about  building  a  tower  without  calcu- 
lating the  expense,  and  is  laughed  at  when  his  inability  to  finish  it  is 
manifested.     Or  to  a  king,  who  rashly  goes  to  war  with  another  of  su- 
perior power.     And  then,  again,  he  repeated  the  main  thought :  "  None 
of  you,  that  forsakcth  not  all  that  he  hath,  can  he  my  disciple.     Salt  ts 
good,  hut  if  the  salt  have  lost  its  savour,  ivhcrcwith  shall  it  he  seasoned  V 
The  disciples  of  Christ,  the  salt  of  mankind,  become  lifeless — a  mere 
appearance — without  self-sacrifice  ;  the  salt  becomes  stale  and  worth- 
less.! 

Kindred  to  this  is  the  passage  in  Mark,  ix.,  49,  50,  which,  con- 

'  It  is  involved  in  the  very  idea  of  following  Christ,  that  he  who  does  it  decides  to  "  bear 
his  own  cross."  The  sense  of  this  phrase  is  well  illustrated  in  Plutarch  (de  Sera  Naminis 
Vindicta,  c.  ix.),  who  says,  that  "  As  wickedness  bears  its  own  punishment  along  with  it,  so 
the  wicked  man  bears  his  own  cross."  Ku(  tcD  niv  aioixart  tUv  Kn\al,oiif.viuv  cKaoToi  KoKovpyiov 
Ixipcpti  rbv  avTov  araupoV  n  if  KuKia  twv  KoKacTripiuv  i<l>'  iavrriv'iKamov  i\  avTrjs  rcKTaivcTai,  Sciv/j  ns 
oZaa  (iiov  Sriixwvpyoi  oinTpoti  xnl  aiiv  alaxi^'JI  ip66ovi  re  ttoAAoi'J  Kai  -RaOiq  xiAsru  koI  )xiTa)iiXuai  Koi 
rapaxui  anavarovi  t'xoiTof.  This  passage  shows  that  Christ  might  have  employed  the  phrase 
without  any  known  reference  to  his  death  ;  the  foi-m  of  the  expression  is,  therefore,  no 
proof  that  the  passage  was  modified  after  his  death  upon  the  cross.  But  John  tells  us  that 
Christ  did  allude  to  his  impending  death  upon  the  cross  in  the  use  of  the  word  v'4'ovv  (xii., 
32) ;  and  this  may  have  been,  and  probably  was,  before  his  mind,  in  connexion  with  his  be- 
in"  delivered  over  to  the  heathen,  when  he  used  the  phrase  in  John.  The  passage  in  Mat- 
thew, therefore,  may  be  taken  as  affording  a  similar  sense ;  and  thus  John  and  the  Synop- 
tical Gospels  agree  in  stating  that  Christ  intimated  the  mode  of  his  death. 

t  Cf.  p.  228. 


312  RETURN  THROUGH  SAMARIA. 

sidered  as  an  isolated  saying,  is  quite  obscure.  But  it  probably  formed 
part  of  one  of  Christ's  exhortations  to  his  disciples  during  this  latter 
period  of  his  stay  with  them.  The  thought  which  it  contains  appears 
to  me  to  be  this.  The  persecutions,  struggles,  and  sufferings  of  the  dis- 
ciples were  to  be  as  salt  to  preserve  and  freshen  the  Divine  life  in  them  ; 
to  make  them  more  and  more  fit  sacrifices  to  be  consecrated  to  God. 
But  (v.  50)  no  external  influences  could  thus  operate  unless  the  ele- 
ment of  the  inner  life,  in  truth,  exists ;  the  salt  must  be  there,  the  spirit 
of  self-sacrifice,  springing  from  the  Divine  life  within,  before  outward 
trials  can  serve  to  purify  the  heart.  The  disciples  were,  therefore,  ex- 
horted to  keep  it  within  them  ;  and,  as  an  aid  thereto,  to  strengthen 
each  other  in  the  Divine  life  by  fellowship  of  heart.  "  Have  salt  in 
yourselves,  and  have  peace  one  xoitli  another.^'' 

The  same  thought,  viz.,  that  his  followers  must  be  prepared  to  sac- 
rifice every  thing  to  the  kingdom  of  God  as  their  highest  good,  was 
also  illustrated  by  the  parables  of  the  treasure  hid  in  the  field,  and  the 
pearl  of  great  price. 

The  single  aim  of  the  first  parable  is  to  show  that  whoever  will  ob- 
tain this  treasure  must  give  up  all  that  he  has  in  order  to  secure  it,  and 
must  consider  all  other  possessions  valueless  in  comparison  with  this, 
his  highest  good.  All  the  rest  is  the  colouring  of  the  picture  to  give 
impressiveness  to  this  one  thought.  The  same  thought  is  presented, 
under  another  figure,  in  the  parable  of  the  costly  pearl.  It  is  probable, 
however,  that  these  varying  forms  of  illustration  were  used  to  describe 
the  different  ways  by  which  men  reach  the  kingdom  of  God  ;  the  acci- 
dental finder  of  the  treasure  in  the  field  corresponding  to  those  to 
Avhom  the  proclamation  of  the  kingdom  comes  unsought  and  unex- 
pected ;  but  whom,  nevertheless,  it  finds  ready  to  receive  it,  and  to 
sacrifice  every  thing  when  its  revealed  glory  rouses  the  slumbering 
Divine  consciousness  within  them.  On  the  other  hand,  as  the  mei*- 
chant  seeks  for  precious  pearls,  and,  after  repeated  search,  finds  one 
of  surpassing  beauty  and  value ;  so  some,  impelled  by  anxious  long- 
ings, pursue  the  kingdom  of  God  with  restless  earnestness,  and  find 
in  it  at  last,  to  the  joy  of  their  hearts,  that  precious  treasure  which 
transcends  all  others,  however  valuable,  in  a  lower  sense,  they  may 
be. 

§  209.  Christ  refuses  to  interfere  in  Civil  Disputes,  (Luke,  xii.,  1.*^- 
15.) — His  Decision  in  the  Case  of  the  Adtdtercss. 
It  was  natural  that  there  should  be  some,  among  the  number  who 
came  under  the  powerful  influence  of  Christ,  to  seek  from  his  author- 
ity the  decision  of  questions  foreign  to  his  calling.  In  such  cases  he 
refused  to  interfere  ;  his  kingdom  was  to  rule  the  hearts  of  men  ;  not 


THE  ADULTERESS.  313 

to  establish  outward  law  or  equity.  On  a  certain  occasion,  one*  of  the 
listening  crowd  asked  him  to  decide  a  dispute  between  himself  and  his 
brother  in  regard  to  an  inheritance.  The  Saviour  repelled  him,  declin- 
ing to  fix  the  limits  of  civil  property  and  decide  in  questions  of  civil 
right;  so  important  did  he  consider  it  to  avoid  even  the  appearance  of 
intermeddling  with  the  affairs  of  human  law  and  government.  And  in 
the  light  of  his  conduct  in  this  case,  we  sec  that  Christianity  is  not  di- 
rectly to  order  the  relations  of  civil  society ;  this  outioard  Divine  au- 
thority is  foreign  to  its  calling.  Christ  worked  only  in  his  own  spliere, 
the  sphere  of  men's  heai'ta ;  although,  indeed,  by  operating  upon  th.e 
heart,  he  meant  to  operate  upon  every  thing  else  ;  for  all  human  rela- 
tions grow  out  of  it.  He  made  use  of  this  opportunity  (v.  15)  to  re 
.  buke  covetousness,  the  source  of  such  contentions  ;  to  show  the  vanity 
of  earthly  wealth  ;  and  to  point  out  the  heavenly  treasures  as  the  only 
object  worth  men's  striving  after. 

The  case  which  follows  undoubtedly  belongs,  chronologically,  to  an 
earlier  period,  not  precisely  determinable  ;  but  we  place  it  here  be- 
cause of  its  affinity,  in  a  certain  sense,  with  that  just  mentioned,  inas- 
much as  it  involved  a  question  of  outward  law.f 

At  a  period  before  the  open  and  decided  manifestation  of  hostility 
on  the  part  of  the  Pharisees,  while  they  were  seeking  privately  to  at- 
tach suspicion  to  Christ  as  the  friend  of  publicans  and  sinners,  they 
brought  to  him  a  woman  taken  in  adultery,  and  asked  whether  she 
ought  not  to  suffer  the  penalty  of  death  prescribed  by  the  Mosaic  law. 
Had  he  ventured  to  pronounce  her  free,  as  they  perhaps  expected  from 
his  well-known  gentleness  to  sinners,  their  object  would  have  been 
gained  ;  they  might  have  involved  him  in  a  dispute  with  the  law  of  Mo- 
ses.    As  the  question  was  foreign  to  his  sphere,  he  at  first  paid  no  at- 

*  1  cannot  agree  in  Schhiermucher' s  opinion  tliat  tliis  was  one  of  those  whom  Christ  had 
asked  to  follow  him.  Had  it  been  so,  Clirist  would  doubtless  have  replied  to  him,  as  he  did 
to  others,  that  lih  followers  must  be  prepared  to  renounce  all  earthly  possessions.  It  was 
not  at  all  wonderful  that  a  man  who  recognized  iu  Jesus  a  teacher  of  Divine  authority, 
should  ask  him  to  arbitrate  a  dispute  between  himself  and  his  brother,  who  may  have  also 
admitted  Christ's  authority. 

t  [There  has  been  much  dispute  about  the  authenticity  of  the  account  of  the  adulterous 
woman;  John,  viii.,  1-11.]  We  think,  both  from  internal  and  external  grounds,  that  it 
does  not  belong  to  John's  Gospel  (see  Liicke  on  the  passage)  ;  perhaps  its  insertion  there 
was  suggested  by  viii.,  15.  But  iu  all  essential  features  it  bears  the  stamp  of  truth  and 
originality.  If  invented  at  all,  it  must  have  been  by  the  Marcionites  ;  but  iu  that  case  it 
would  have  been  coloured  more  highly  with  opposition  to  the  Mosaic  law  ;  nor  could  an  in- 
vention of  theirs  have  found  such  general  currency  in  the  Catholic  Church.  The  difficulties 
consist  more  in  the  form  than  in  the  substance  of  the  narrative  ;  and  even  these  can  be 
readily  overcome.  As  to  the  account  in  Evang.  ad  Hebricos  (Eus.,  iii.,  39)  of  a  woman  ac- 
cused of  many  sins  before  tiie  Saviour,  we  know  too  little  about  it  to  decide  whether  it 
was  true  and  original,  or  a  mere  exaggeration  either  of  the  one  before  us  in  Jolm,  or  of  the 
other  account  of  the  sinful  woman  who  anointed  the  feet  of  Jesus  (p.  211)  ;  or  wliether 
it  arose  from  a  blending  of  the  two  together. 


314  RETURN  THROUGH  SAMARIA. 

tention,  but  stooped  and  wrote  upon  the  ground.  They  pressed  the 
point,  however,  and  he  then  drew  the  question  out  of  the  sphere  of 
law  into  that  of  morality^  which  was  properly  his  own.  Looking 
round  ujion  them  with  all  his  majesty  of  mien,  he  said,  "iJe  that  u 
without  sin  among  you,  let  him  first  cast  a  stone  at  her^ 

It  is  true,  that  from  the  stand-point  of  law  the  moral  character  of 
the  judge  is  of  no  account;  it  is  the  law  alone  that  judges.  But  from 
the  stand-point  of  morality,  he  that  condemns  another  {i.  e.,  the  sinner, 
not  merely  the  sin)  while  conscious  of  sin  himself,  though  of  another 
kind,  pronounces  his  own  condemnation  (Rom.,  ii.,  1).  His  own  con- 
science bears  witness  against  him.  In  this  case,  therefore,  Christ  aj)- 
pealed  to  the  consciences  of  the  accusers,  not  only  to  dispose  them  to 
leniency,  but  also  to  awaken  in  them  a  common  sense  of  sin,  and  need 
of  pardon  and  redemption.  To  the  woman,  who  was  bowed  down  un- 
der the  burden  of  sin,  he  said,  "  Neither  do  I  condemn  thee  ;''  cautioning 
her,  at  the  same  time,  to  guard  against  falling  again  into  transgression. 

§  210.  Christ's  Intijnations  of  the  Future. 
The  discourses  of  Christ  in  the  course  of  this  journey  reveal  to  us 
the  topic  on  which  his  thoughts  were  chiefly  occupied  at  this  critical 
period.  In  the  spiritual  results  of  his  preaching  he  saw  the  earnest  ot 
that  new  creation  which  was  to  follow  his  death.  Knowing  all  that  lav 
before  him  at  Jerusalem,  he  went  on  to  meet  his  death  in  conflict  with 
the  representatives  of  the  depraved  spirit  of  the  world  at  Jerusalem  ; 
yet  contemplating  with  joy  the  progress  of  his  kingdom,  for  which  this 
self-sacrifice  was  to  pave  the  way.  At  the  same  time  commenced  those 
vehement  emotions  of  soul  which  afterward,  under  various  and  pain- 
ful excitements  fi-om  without,  grew  stronger  and  stronger,  until  his  final 
and  triumphant  "^  It  is  finished  1''^ 

§  211.  Parahles  of  the  Mustard  Seed  and  ofi  the  Leaven.     (Luke,  xiii. 

18-21.) — Points  of  Agreement  and  Differe^ice. —  Compared  with  the 

Parable  of  the  Ripening  Grain.     (Mark,  iv.,  26.) 

Christ  recognized  in  the  little  circle  that  gathered  around  him  tlio 
germ  of  a  community  which  was  to  embrace  all  nations.  Piercing  the 
veil  which  obscured  the  future  from  ordinary  eyes,  he  saw  the  spirit- 
ual life  of  mankind  in  all  its  relations  revolutionized  by  the  power  of 
his  word.  A  total  change  in  the  disciples'  mode  of  thinking  was  in 
preparation  ;  the  truth  they  had  received  was  to  be  freed  from  the  manv 
foreign  elements  that  yet  encumbered  it.  Thus  the  Divine  word  was 
to  work  both  extensively  and  intensively.  These  forms  of  its  operation 
ho  illustrated  by  the  parables  of  the  mustard  seed  and  the  lcave7i.* 

*  Luke  gives  these  parables  in  the  connexion  we  have  assij^ned  to  them.  In  Matthew 
they  are  placed  along  with  others  of  a  very  dilTerent  character,  only  agreeing  in  the  oua 


THE  FIRE  TO  BE  KINDLED.  315 

The  point  in  which  the  two  parables  agree  is,  the  designating  of  the 
power  with  which  the  kingdom  of  God,  where  the  truth  has  once  been 
received,  developes  itself  outwardly  from  within  ;  the  greatest  results 
proceeding  from  apparently  the  most  insignificant  beginnings.  The 
point  in  which  they  differ  is,  that  the  developement  illustrated  in  the 
parable  of  the  mustard  seed  is  more  extensive,  in  that  of  the  leaven 
more  intensive ;  in  the  former  is  shown  the  power  with  which  the 
Church,  so  feeble  in  its  beginning,  spreads  over  all  the  earth;  in  the 
latter,  the  principle  of  Divine  life  in  Christianity  renews  human  nature, 
in  all  its  parts  and  powers,  after  its  own  image,  to  become  its  own  or- 
gan ;  thus  illustrating  the  growth  of  religion  not  only  in  the  race,  but 
also  in  individual  men. 

Here  we  notice,  also,  a  pai'able*  preserved  to  us  by  Mark  alone  (iv., 
20).  "  Ho  is  the  kingdom  of  God,  as  if  a  man  should  cast  seed  into  the 
ground ;  and  should  sleep,  and  rise  night  and  day,  and  the  seed  should 
spring  and  grow  up,  he  knoivcth  not  hoiv.  For  the  earth  hringeth  forth 
fruit  of  herself ;  first  the  blade,  then  the  ear,  after  that  the  full  corn  in 
the  ear.  But  when  the  grain  is  ripe,  immediately  he  putfeth  in  the  sick- 
le, because  the  harvest  is  corned  Christ  obviously  intended  by  this 
parable  to  impress  upon  the  disciples  that  tlicir  duty  was  to  preach  the 
word  [not  to  make  it  fruitful]  ;  that  where  the  truth  was  once  implanted 
in  the  heart,  its  growth  was  independent  of  human  agency ;  unfolding 
itself  by  its  own  inherent  Divine  power,  it  would  gradually  accom- 
plish the  transformation  of  human  nature  into  that  perfection  for  which 
God  designed  it  [they^Z/  corn  in  the  ear].  The  preachers  of  truth  are 
instruments  of  a  power  whose  effects  they  cannot  measure.  If  they 
only  preach  the  word,  and  do  nothing  further  to  it,  it  will  by  its  own 
efficacy  produce  in  men  a  new  creation,  which  they  must  behold  with 
amazement  (v.  27).  No  words  could  have  more  pointedly  oj^posed  the 
prevalent  carnal  notions  of  the  Jews  in  x'egard  to  the  nature  of  Mes- 
siah's kingdom,  or  have  more  effectually  rebyked  the  tendency  to  as- 
cribe too  much  to  human  agencies  and  too  little  to  the  substantive 
power  of  the  word  itself. 

§  212.    The  Fire  to  be  Kindled. —  The  Baptism  of  Sufferings. —  Christ- 
ianity not  Peace,  but  a  Sword.     (Luke,  xii.,  49-53.) 
"  I  am  come  to  send  fire  upon  the  earth  ;  and  what  will  I  (more),  if 

point  of  general  bearing  upon  the  kingdom  of  God.     On  the  arrangement  of  the  parables, 
cf.  p.  108. 

*  This  parable  bears  the  undeniable  stamp  of  originality  both  in  its  matter  and  fonn ;  so 
that  we  cannot  coHsider  it  as  a  variation  of  one  of  the  other  parables  of  the  growing  seed. 
It  is  worthy  of  note  that,  just  as  in  the  different  nairatives  of  the  same  discourse  given  in 
the  first  three  Gospels,  one  Evangelist  preserves  one  portion  and  another  another,  so  in  re- 
"ard  to  these  parables  illustrative  of  the  intensive  operation  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  Mark 
alone  has  preserved  the  one  of  the  ripening  corn,  omitting  the  leaven  ;  while  Matthew  and 
Luke  give  the  latter,  omitting  the  fonner.     • 


316  RETURN  THROUGH  SAMARIA. 

it  he  already  hindlcdV^  As  he  had  compared  the  pervadinor  and  re- 
newing power  of  the  word  of  truth  to  the  leaven,  so  here,  as  that  word 
sends  forth  a  holy  flame  which  is  to  seize  upon  human  nature  and  burn 
out  all  its  dross  and  impurity — inextinguishable  until  it  has  enveloped 
all  mankind — he  compares  it  to  a  fii-e  kindled  by  himself,  whose  un- 
quenchable flames  he  already  sees  bursting  forth.  "  What  will  I  more  ?" 
says  he  ;   "  the  object  of  my  ministry  on  earth  is  so  far  accomplished." 

But  after  speaking  thus  of  what  had  been  already  done,  he  passed 
on  to  what  remained  for  the  fulfilment  of  his  work,  viz.,  the  sufferings 
that  were  awaiting  him.  These  he  betokens  by  a  baptism  which  he 
must  undergo ;  partly,  perhaps,  in  view  of  the  multitude  of  afflictions 
that  were  to  overwhelm  him,*  and  partly  in  view  of  baptism  as  a  re- 
ligious symbol,  and  of  the  baptism  of  suffering  as  his  last  and  perfect 
consecration  as  Messiah  and  Redeemer;  just  as  John's  baptism  was 
the  first  and  preparatory  one.  "  I  have  yet  a  haptism  [of  suffering]  to 
he  haptized  with,  and  how  sorely  am  I  pained  until  it  he  accomplished  "\ 

In  this  saying,  also,  Christ  contradicted  the  prevailing  idea  that  the 
Messiah  was  to  work  an  outward  revolution.  The  preached  word  it- 
self was  the  mighty  flame  which  was  to  produce  such  wondei-ful  effects 
among  mankind.  He  was  not  to  end  his  labours  by  coming  forward 
to  subdue  his  foes  and  glorify  his  reign  by  miraculous  power;  his  vic- 
tory consisted  in  his  being  overcome  by  suffering  and  death.  And  he 
warned  his  disciples,  in  addition  (v.  51,  52),  not  to  imagine  that  he 
would  leave  them  to  enjoy  outward  peace;  far  from  it;  the  truth  of 
God  was  to  be  a  separating  power,  to  cause  the  sharpest  strifes  in  na- 
tions and  in  families.  The  dearest  natural  ties  were  to  be  sundered  by 
his  ti'ue  disciples  (v.  53),  for  the  sake  of  the  kingdom  of  Gou.|  The 
higher  unity  of  Christianity  was  to  shape  itself  out  of  the  midst  of  dis- 
cords and  contradictions.     So  clearly  had  Christ  at  that  time  before 

*  To  "immerse  himself  in  sufferings." 

t  The  common  interpretation  of  these  two  verses  (which  is  certainly  a  possible  one)  con- 
sidei's  the  two  members  as  co-ordinate — n  ^iXio  as  corresponding  to  tws'  cv\'ixo\).rii ;  and 
£(  yfir]  diijipOri  to  cuii  ov  reXcadrj :  "  I  am  come  to  Send  a  fire  on  the  earth,  and  how  do  I  wish  it 
■were  already  kindled  !  bat  I  have  still  the  baptism  of  suffering  to  undergo,  and  how  am  I 
pained  until  it  be  fulfilled."  This  places  the  whole  iu  the  future.  And  in  a  certain  sense, 
indeed,  Christ  tniffht  have  said  that  the  fire  which  he  came  to  light  among  men  was  not  as 
yet  kindled  ;  for  the  great  crisis  which  Christianity  was  to  produce  in  humanity  had  not  as 
yet  come.  In  this  sense  of  the  passage,  it  expresses  Christ's  longing  for  this  crisis ;  for 
the  accomplishment  of  bis  work  as  Saviour  by  the  consecration  of  his  sufferings.  But  wo 
think,  in  view  of  the  parables  of  the  mustard  seed,  the  leaven,  and  the  ripening  corn,  that 
he  alli^ded  in  the  first  clause  to  what  had  been  done  ;  the  fire  burned  already,  though  hut 
glimmering  in  secret,  in  the  hearts  of  those  that  received  his  preaching  as  the  word  of 
eternal  life.  The  words  ri  $iXo>  are  thus  interpreted  more  naturally ;  though,  as  we  have 
said,  the  other  rendering  is  not  impossible  (Matt.,  vii.,  I4,  cannot  decide  the  question,  as 
the  reading  of  that  passage  is  doubtful).  The  6i:  in  v.  50  is  adversative,  acconling  to  our 
view,  which,  by  the  way,  was  adopted  (among  the  ancients)  by  Eiidn/ynius  ZisahcnuK 
The  word  ovvtxoiiai,  thus  apprehended,  was  Christ's  first  expression  of  his  struggles  of  soul 
in  view  of  the  approach  of  death.  \  Cf  Matt.,  x.,  34,  seq. 


THE  SECOND  ADVENT.  317 

his  eyes  the  effects  subsequently  produced  every  where  by  Christianity 
in  the  life  of  nations  and  of  families. 

§  213.    The  Kingdom  of  God  cometh  not  with   Ohservation.      (Luke, 

xvii.,  20.) 
When  the  Pharisees  demanded  of  him  when  the  kingdom  of  Gou 
should  appear,  he  assured  them,  "  The  kingdom  of  God  cometh  not  toith 
outward  show""  (cannot  be  outwardly  seen  by  human  eyes)  ;*  "  neither 
shall  they  say,  Lo  here  !  or,  Lo  there  !  for,  behold,  the  hingdom  of  God 
is  among  you."\ 

§  2l\.  The  personal  Return,  of  Christ  to  the  Earth,  and  the  Day  of 
Judgment.     (Luke,  xvii.,  22-37.) 

Having  thus  pointed  out  that  the  kingdom  of  God  was  manifested 
in  his  own  appearance,  Christ  turned  directly  to  the  disciples,  and  told 
them  (v.  22)  that  the  time  would  come  when  they  should  look  back 
longingly  upon  the  days  of  their  personal  intercourse  with  him,  and 
wish,  though  in  vain,  to  have  him  even  for  one  day  in  their  midst.  But 
(v.  23,  24)  as  this  longing  might  lay  them  open  to  deception  (as,  in  fact, 
at  a  later  period,  their  anxious  yearnings  did  lead  them  to  expect  his 
personal  return  too  soon),  he  warned  them  against  this  danger.  "  Do 
not  suffer  yourselves  to  be  deceived  by  false  reports  of  my  return  ; 
when  it  comes,  it  will  be  as  the  lightning  that  flashes  suddenly  from 
one  end  of  the  sky  to  another,  dazzling  all  men's  eyes ;  none  need 
point  it  out  to  others ;  none  can  fail  to  see  it,  or  deny  its  approach. "| 

To  obviate  all  carnal  expectations,  he  then  told  them  (v.  25)  that 
"  He  mustfrsl  suffer  many  things,  and  be  rejected  of  this  generation  ,•" 

*  Tlic  autithesis  is,  that  it  reveals  itself  invisibly,  so  as  to  be  seen  only  by  the  eye  ot 
faith. 

t  The  words  citos  vimv  may,  indeed,  mean  "  within  you,"  as  they  are  commonly  inter- 
preted ;  but  this  would  not  suit  the  persons  addressed,  for  they  were  as  yet  strangers  to 
the  kingdom  of  God,  the  foundation  of  faith  not  having  been  laid  in  their  hearts.  The  pas- 
sage, thus  understood,  would  have  been  applicable  only  to  believers.  Ciirist  would  not 
have  expressed  himself  iu  a  way  so  liable  to  misconstruction  and  perversion  on  the  part 
of  the  Pharisees.  Had  he  meant  to  tell  them  that  the  kingdom  of  God  muxt  be  prepared 
within  their  hearts,  he  would  have  warned  them,  instead  of  looking  for  its  outward  ap 
pearauce,  to  strive  to  fit  themselves  for  it  by  laying  the  only  basis  of  which  it  admitted,  in 
the  dispositions  of  their  hearts.  Every  thing  is  clear  and  natural  if  we  take  the  words  in 
the  sense  that  we  have  assigned  to  them  :  "The  kingdom  of  God  is  in  your  midst,  if  you 
will  only  recognize  it.  You  must  not  seek  at  a  distance  what  is  already  near;  the  king- 
dom of  God  }ms  come  in  luy  ministry  ;  and  all  that  believe  on  me  belong  to  it."  This 
agrees  also  with  his  usual  mode  of  treating  the  Pharisees  ;  he  always  pointed  out  to  them 
the  true  meaning  of  his  appearance.     Cf.  Matt.,  xii.,  28  ;  and  p.  241,  seq. 

t  Christ  here  declares  that  his  actual  coming  would  not  follow  the  analogy  of  earthly 
manifestations ;  and  this  ought  to  have  been  enough  to  hinder  believing  dogmatists  from 
seeking  to  define  its  character  too  accurately,  and  from  adhering  too  closely  to  the  letter 
of  some  of  the  expressions  of  the  Apostles,  who  could  themselves  as  yet  have  had  no  ade- 
ijuate  iutuitiou  of  its  precise  nature. 


318  RETURN  THROUGH  SAMARIA. 

and  that,  when  the  glorified  Son  of  Man  should  appear  to  judge  a  cor- 
rupt world  (v.  26-32),  in  that  day  of  trial  and  sifting  that  was  to  pre- 
cede the  consummation  of  the  kingdom,  he  would  take  men  unawares, 
and  surprise  sinners  in  their  lusts.  He  presented  the  whole  in  one 
view  before  them,  without  distinguishing  the  separate  moments.*  His 
object  was  to  guard  them  against  both  premature  expectations  and  ar- 
bitrary calculations  upon  the  character  of  the  final  decision  ;  to  im- 
press them  with  the  importance  of  being  always  prepared,  both  in 
heart  and  in  life,  by  that  self-denial  and  renunciation  of  the  world  (v. 
33)  which  he  always  made  the  necessary  condition  of  entering  into  his 
kingdom.  He  then  pointed  out  (v.  34-36)  the  fanning  process  by  which 
the  distinctive  characters  of  men  in  the  same  relations  of  life  would  be 
revealed  ;  "  one  shall  be  taken  (saved  and  received  into  the  kingdom) 
and  another  left"  (to  the  judgment  of  God  ;  not  removed  from  it). 
As  this  last  expression  (though  intelligible  enough  from  the  connexion) 
was  somewhat  obscure,  the  disciples  asked  him,  "  Left?  where.  Lord  ?" 
He  replied,  "  Whcrcsoevo-  the  carcase  is,  tliithcr  will  the  eagles  he  gath- 
ered togethe)-''^]  (condemnation  will  fall  upon  those  that  have  deserved  it). 

^  215.  Exhortation  to  Watch  for  Christ's  Coming  (Luke,  xii.,  3C- 
48);  to  Confi.dence  in  the  Divine  Justice. —  The  importunate  'Wiihnc. 
(Luke,  xviii.,  1.) 

On  another  occasion,  when  surrounded  by  a  larger  circle  of  disciples, 
Christ  exhorted  tlie  faithful  to  watch  for  the  time  when  he  would  re- 
turn from  his  glory  in  heaven  and  demand  an  account  of  their  steward- 
ship. How  earnestly  he  sought  to  guard  them  against  all  attempts  to 
determine  the  precise  time  of  his  coming,  is  manifest  from  his  decla- 
ring that  it  was  just  as  uncertain  as  the  moment  when  a  thief  would 
break  into  the  house  at  night.  It  might  be  deferred,  he  told  them,  un- 
til the  night  was  far  spent — even  to  the  third  watch.'j:  Very  naturiilly 
Peter  (conscious  of  his  position  and  that  of  the  other  Apostles)  liere 
interrupted  Jesus  with  the  question,  whether  the  parable  was  spoken 
in  reference  to  the  narrower  circle  of  disciples  in  jiarticular,  or  to  all 
that  were  present.  The  reply  of  Christ  (v.  47,  48)  was,  in  effect,  that 
the  greater  one's  knowledge,  the  greater  his  guilt,  if  that  knowledge 
be  not  improved.  On  this  jirinciple  the  Apostles  could  decide  for  them- 
selves the  relation  in  which  they  stood  to  others. 

Christ  exhorted  his  followers,  in  all  their  struggles  with  the  sins  of 
mankind,  to  trust  in  the  justice  of  their  heavenly  Father,  who  would 

*  Sec  below,  where  we  speak  of  Christ's  last  discourses. 

t  Luke,  xvii.,  37,  gives  the  natural  connexion  of  these  words  ;  in  Matt.,  xxiv.,  0>",  tboy 
are  placed  with  many  other  similar  passages  referring  to  this  last  crisis. 
\  It  is  clear  that  Paul  had  these  words  of  Christ  in  view  in  1  Thess.,  v.,  1. 


THE  STRAIT  GATE.  519 

judge  between  them  and  a  persecuting  world  (Luke,  xviii.,  1,  seq.)  ; 
and  to  seek  support  and  encouragement  in  prayer.  If  a  judo-e  to 
whom  nothing  is  sacred  does  justice  to  the  persevering  widow,  simply 
to  get  rid  of  her  importunity,  how  could  God  leave  unheard  the  con- 
tinued prayers  of  his  chosen  ones  invoking  his  justice  1  Thouo-h  His 
forbearance  may  seem  like  delay,  his  justice  will  not  fail ;  "He  toUl 
avenge  them  speedUyr*  The  decision  of  the  Divine  justice  between 
the  degenerate  Theocratic  nation  and  the  new  and  genuine  congrega- 
tion of  God  was,  indeed,  to  prepare  its  course  more  and  more  rapidly. 
To  long  for  a  revelation  of  Divine  justice  before  all  the  world,  atid 
for  the  time  when  He  shall  judge  between  the  good  and  the  bad,  is  not 
at  all  inconsistent  with  prayer  for  the  salvation  of  the  enemies  of  his 
kingdom,  as  enjoined  both  by  Christ's  teaching  and  example.  The 
combination  of  the  two  is  a  thoi-oughly  Christian  one. 

The  Saviour  finally  put  the  question  whether,  under  the  delays  of 
Divine  justice,  all  that  believed  on  him  would  hold  fast  their  integrity ; 
whether  the  Son  of  Man  would  find  faith  remaining  in  them  all  when 
he  should  reveal  himself  to  his  Church  a  second  time.t 

^216.   Call    to  entire  Devotion. The  Strait    Gate  and   the  Narrow 

Way. — Heathen  admitted  to  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven.     (Luke,  xiii., 
24-28.) 

The  hosts  that  gathered  about  the  Saviour  at  this  period  were  ex- 
horted to  make  good  use  of  the  short  time  remaining  to  them  to  re- 
pent and  believe,  in  order  to  escape  the  Divine  judgments  that  were  so 
soon  to  break  upon  the  Jewish  people.  Such  as  were  not  hostile,  and 
even  rejoiced  in  his  society,  were  told  not  to  rest  upon  his  personal 
presence  (v.  26),  or  upon  their  superficial  interest  in  him.  All  this 
would  do  no  good  (he  told  them)  unless  his  word  were  truly  received 
and  applied  ;  unless  they  sought  earnestly,  by  self-denial  and  self-sac- 
rifice, to  enter  the  kingdom  to  which  no  road  leads  but  this  narrow 

*  We  caunot  see  a  clear  correspondence  between  Luke,  xviii.,  1,  and  what  follows.  The 
whole  passage  exhorts  to  confidence  in  God's  justice,  no  matter  what  wrong  we  may  see 
done ;  not  to  praying  ahoayx  ;  for  constant  prayer  has  another  aim  and  object.  It  is  pre- 
supposed that  those  who  are  addressed  pray,  like  children,  to  their  heavenly  Father ;  but 
they  are  exhorted  not  to  waver,  if  the  answer  to  their  prayers  be  delayed. 

t  Luke,  xviii.,  8.  This  was  probably  the  sense  of  the  words  in  this  connexion;  we  mujt 
remember  the  various  applications  of  which  the  phrase  "  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  Man" 
admits,  and  in  the  intentional  indefiniteness  in  which  it  was  left.  It  may  be  applied  cither 
to  his  spiritual  or  his  personal  self  manifestation  in  the  progress  of  human  affairs  and  of  the 
Church.  At  all  events,  we  Kud  no  ground  to  suppose  (as  some  do)  that  the  passage  was 
modified  at  a  later  period,  when  men  were  running  to  and  fro  in  perplexity  of  opinion  about 
the  second  advent  of  Christ.  The  prophetic  description  of  the  last  ilays  given  by  Paul 
presupposes  that  intimations  of  the  same  had  been  thrown  out  by  Jesus.  It  is  more 
likely  that  the  words  were  transferred  from  some  other  connexion  in  which  Christ  really 
spoke  of  his  second  advent,  than  that  they  were  thus  modified  at  an  after  period. 


320  RETURN  THROUGH  SAMARIA. 

and  toilsome  way.*  "  Many  ivill  scch  to  enter  in,  and  shall  not  he  ahUy 
Not  those  who  seek  aright ;  but  those  who  seek,  without  the  heart  or 
the  will,  to  fulfil  the  essential  condition  of  entire  self-denial. 

Thus  the  one  truth  proclaimed  by  Christ  presents  opposite  aspects 
under  opposite  circumstances.  To  oppressed  and  weary  souls,  groan- 
inw  under  the  heavy  burdens  imposed  by  the  Pharisees,  he  describes 
hie  yoke  as  mild  and  easy — easy  to  those  that  love — in  comparison 
with  the  yoke  of  the  law  ;t  while  to  those  who  are  yet  in  bondage  t^) 
the  world  of  sense,  and  expect  to  find  his  service  easy,  he  represents 
it  as  painful  and  laborious.  Every  thing  depends  upon  the  heart  and 
the  motives ;   what  is  hard  to  one  is  easy  to  another 

In  further  contrast  with  the  disposition  to  look  merely  at  outward  re- 
lations, he  announced  prophetically  (v.  28),  that  while  many  who  glori- 
ed in  their  personal  intercourse  with  him  might  be  excluded  from  the 
kingdom  for  want  of  fellowship  of  spirit  with  him,  many,  on  the  other 
hand,  from  all  quarters  of  the  world,  should  be  called  to  enter  in, 

§  217.  The  Signs  of  the  Times.  (Luke,  xii.,  54.) 
Others,  again,  were  referred  by  Christ  to  the  signs  of  the  times  to  learn 
the  import  of  his  appearance,  and  what  awaited  them  if  they  neglected 
it.  As  they  could  know  from  a  cloud  in  the  west  that  a  storm  was  ap- 
proaching, and  from  the  blowing  of  the  south  wind  that  there  would 
be  heat;  so  (he  told  them),  if  they  would  observe  the  signs  of  history 
as  carefully  as  those  of  nature,  they  could  discern  the  approaching 
judgments  of  God  from  the  phenomena  of  the  times.  But  this  was 
pi'ecisely  their  guilt  (v.  5G),  that  in  their  heedless  folly  they  gave  no 
thought  to  these  indications  of  the  evil  that  was  nigh.  He  called  them 
hypocrites,  either  because  they  affected  to  plead  ignorance  while  tln' 
means  of  knowledge  were  within  their  reach,  and  lacked  the  disposi- 
tion to  see,  not  the'  ability  ;  or  because,  while  the  present  was  serious, 
and  \he  future  threatening,  they  were  utterly  unconscious  of  the  value 
of  intercourse  with  him  from  their  folly  in  neglecting  the  signs  of  the 
times,  and  now  sought  him  under  the  imjmlse  of  a  merely  transient 
excitement.^ 

"*  Cf.  p.  236.  t  Cf.  p.  202. 

X  Cf.  Mutt.,  xvi.,  1.  lu  a  very  similar  discourse  the  Piiarisees  demanded  a  &v^n  from 
heaven  to  accredit  his  calling ;  he  told  them  severely,  that  if  they  would  only  consider  the 
sign  of  his  u-holc  manifeslalion,  in  connexion  with  the  signs  given  by  God  in  the  events  of 
the  times,  they  would  make  no  such  demand.  They  could  foretel  the  weather  from  the 
clouds  and  sky  ;  but  would  not  see  ia  the  events  around  them  the  signs  of  the  coming  cri- 
sis, the  a[iproaoh  of  the  kingdom  and  judgment  of  God.  '  This  fallen  generation  seeks  a 
sign  from  heaven,  but  no  sign  shall  be  given  to  it  but  the  sign  of  the  Prophet  Jonah ;  the 
whole  appearance  of  Christ,  which  announces  to  them,  as  Jonah  did  to  the  Ninevites,  the 
Divine  judgments  over  their  corrupt  city,  calling  them  to  repent.'  His  manifestation  was 
above  all  other  signs  of  the  times,  and  they  might  discern  what  was  coming  from  it.    He 


DIVES  AND  LAZARUS.  321 

"  Yea,  and  why  even  of  yourselves  judge  ye  not  what  is  right  !* 
When  thou  goest  ivith  thine  adversary,'"'  &c.  (v.  58).  (Why  must  an- 
other point  out  to  them  what  they  ought  to  know  themselves,  viz.,  that 
they  should  agree  with  the  Messiah  while  he  was  yet  with  them  on 
earth  ;  since  he  would  otherwise  become  their  accuser  before  Goo.i 
and  make  it  impossible  to  escape  the  penalty  they  so  justly  deserved| — 
an  allusion  to  the  terrible  lot  which  the  Jewish  people  procured  for 
themselves.) 

§  818.  The  contracted  Jewish  Theodicy  Rejected.  (Luke,  xiii.,  1-5.) 
Certain  sad  events  of  the  times  were  employed  by  Christ  as  type.^ 
and  warnings  of  the  future.  It  was  reported  to  him  that  Pilate  had 
caused  several  Galileans  to  be  slain  while  offering  sacrifices  in  the 
Temple.  The  details  of  the  case  are  unknown  to  us  ;  whether  it  was 
carelessly  reported  by  persons  who  did  not  know  its  connexion  with 
the  whole  sad  and  terrible  course  of  events  into  which  the  guilt  of  the 
nation  was  hurrying  it;  or  whether  they  considered,  according  to  the 
contracted  notions  of  the  Jews  in  regard  to  the  avenging  justice  of 
God,  that  these  Galileans  deserved  this  wretched  fate.5  In  answerino- 
them,  Christ  declared  that  guilt  was  common  to  the  whole  people,  and 
that  unless  they  became  convinced  of  it  and  repented,  they  might  all 
expect  destruction.  A  tower,  also,  had  fallen  upon  several  persons  in 
Jerusalem  and  killed  them ;  but  this,  he  told  them,  did  not  prove  any 
marked  guilt  on  the  part  of  the  unfortunate  sufferers,  but  was  rather  a 
sign  of  the  universal  wretchedness  which  the  guilt  of  the  whole  people 
was  to  bring  upon  them. 

§  219.    The  Parahle  of  Dives  and  Lazarus.     (Luke,  xvi.,  19-31.) 
The  worldly  spirit,  suppressing  all  sense  of  higher  interests,  was  the 
chief  cause  of  the  unbelief  or  inattention  of  the  eye-witnesses  of  Christ's 

calls  them  Jiypocriles  because,  for  want  of  a  right  spirit,  they  tconld  not  see  the  si^s  be- 
fore their  eyes  ;  which  very  fact  was  the  cause  of  their  seeking  a  sign  from  heaven.  This 
is  very  similar  to  the  discourse  in  Lulie,  and  Christ  might  very  well  have  uttered  both  in 
separate  but  similar  comiexions.  The  connexion  is  entirely  apt  in  both  Evangelists,  thousrh 
not  so  obvious  in  Luke.  To  be  sure,  the  one  in  Matthew  follows  immediately  after  the  un- 
historical  second  feeding  of  4000,  but  the  question  in  xvi.,  1,  afforded  a  very  suitable  occa- 
sion for  it;  whether  the  occasion  was  the  same  as  that  mentioned  on  p.  2-15,  or  a  different 
one.     It  is  veiy  possible  that  the  question  and  answer  occuiTed  twice. 

*  It  is  true  that  v.  57  will  admit  of  Schleiermackcr's  interpretation,  viz.,  "  That  which 
they  might  know  of  themselves  from  within  in  contrast  to  the  signs  of  the  times  without." 
But  does  not  what  follows  presuppose  that  they  had  already  learned  from  the  signs  of  the 
times  the  true  import  of  Christ's  appearance,  and  therefore  could  easily  decide  for  them- 
selves what  line  of  conduct  to  pursue  in  order  to  escape  the  impending  judgments  of  God. 

t  In  so  far,  namely,  that  their  guilt  lay  in  their  conduct  towards  him. 

X  The  parabolic  comparison  in  its  complete  form  is  given  in  Luke,  xii.,  58,  59,  and  in  its 
proper  connexion  ;  but  not  in  Matt.,  v.,  2.5,  26.  Cf  p.  233.  It  is  obvious  that  the  passage 
has  no  reference,  as  has  been  erroneously  supposed,  to  the  state  of  man  after  death. 

§  See  p.  298. 

X 


322  RETURN  THROUGH  SAMARIA. 

labours.  In  the  parable  of  Dives  and  Lazarus  Christ  showed  that  no 
miracles  or  revelations  could  lead  a  thoroughly  worldly  mind  to  re- 
pentance and  faith  ;  that  change  oi  nature  was  indispensably  necessary. 
Impressions  made  upon  such  minds  from  without  could  be  but  tran- 
sient and  superficial.  The  disposition  with  which  a  given  grace  is  used 
is  the  one  important  element ;  and  their  bearing  towai'ds  Christ's  reve- 
lations ought  to  correspond  to  the  regard  which  they  professed  to  en- 
tertain for  those  of  the  Old  Testament. 

The  prominent  thought  in  the  parable  is  this  :  "  He  that  could  not 
be  awakened  to  repentance  by  Moses  and  the  prophets  could  not  be 
by  the  reappearance  of  the  dead."*  The  subordinate  point  is  the  con- 
trast between  the  rich  man  and  Lazarus;  the  former,  representing 
those  who  seek  their  highest  good  in  the  pleasures  of  rtie  world,  and 
are  thereby  excluded  from  the  kingdom  of  God,  forming  the  principal 
figure.  Lazarus  serves  as  a  foil  to  the  worldly  rich  man  ;  but  it  must 
yet  be  remembered  that  the  kingdom  found  the  hearts  of  rich  men  far 
less  accessible  than  those  of  the  humbly  poor  like  Lazarus ;  for  the 
very  reason  that  their  feelings  and  dispositions  were  precisely  those  of 
the  Dives  of  the  parable.t 

'  There  is  no  allusion  in  Luke,  xvi.,  31,  to  Christ's  resurrection;  a  proof  that  it  has  been 
transmitted  pure,  especially  as  such  a  bearing^  could  easily  have  been  given  to  it,  as  was 
done  in  Matthew  on  the  "  Sigii  of  the  Prophet  Jonah."  Dc  Wette  has  remarked  this.  Still 
the  passage  contains  a  reason  for  Clmst's  non-appearance  after  his  resurrection  to  those 
who  could  not  be  brought  to  believe  on  him  during  the  period  of  his  public  ministry  on  earth. 

t  The  assertion  lias  been  made  (especially  by  Strauss)  that  this  parable  does  not  treat 
at  all  of  the  dispositions  of  the  heart,  and  of  their  consequences  in  another  world,  but  only 
of  the  opposite  conditions  of  human  life,  poverty  and  wealth;  and  of  the  removal  of  such 
inequalities  in  the  next  life.  It  is  pretended  that  the  parable  is  founded  ou  the  Ebionitish 
doctrine  that  wealth  is  intrinsically  sinful,  and  poverty  intrinsically  meritorious ;  and,  ac 
cordiugly,  that  the  conditions  of  men  in  the  future  life  wilT  be  inversely  as  their  conditions  . 
here.  In  support  of  this  view,  it  is  remarked  that  the  parable  says  nothing  of  the  spirit 
in  which  Lazarus  bore  his  sufferings  ;  that  it  does  not  ascribe  a, sinful  life  to  the  rich  man  ; 
and  that  the  rebuke  of  the  latter  says,  not  that  he  desei-ved  to  suffer  for  his  sins,  but  that 
it  was  now  his  turn  to  suffer,  because  he  had  enjoyed  his  good  things  in  this  life.  But  (1.) 
Is  not  the  description  of  Lazarus,  sick  and  starving,  waiting  at  the  inch  man's  door  for  a 
iiiorsel  from  his  table,  and  receiving  from  dogs  the  tendance  which  man  refused — is  not  this 
the  strongest  possible  indictment  of  Dives's  selfishness  and  want  of  love  /  Misery  lay  at 
his  door;  but  instead  of  sympathizing  with  it,  he  sated  himself  with  sensual  enjoyments. 
('2.)  The  sentence,  "  Thou  in  thy  lifetime  hadst  thy  good  things,  and  now  .  .  thou  art  tor- 
mented," implies  the  cause  of  his  torment ;  he  had  sought  his  highest  good  in  eai-thly  things 
and  stifled  all  the  higher  wants  of  his  soul ;  and  now,  when  tora  ii-om  his  illusions,  the  sense 
of  want,  the  thirst  for  what  alone  could  refresh  his  spirit,  arose  of  necessity  more  power- 
fully within  him.  The  figures,  as  figures,  are  not  accidental ;  they  contain  the  trutii  in  a 
symbolical  form,  although  we  must  not  look  for  it  in  all  the  subordinate  details  of  the  pic- 
ture ;  and  although  it  is  altogether  foreign  to  the  scope  of  the"  parable  to  give  a  clue  to  the 
nature  of  the  future  life.  (3.)  The  veiy  expression  of  a  desire  on  the  part  of  Dives  to  send 
Lazarus  to  warn  his  brothers  by  describing  his  sufferings  to  them,  implies  that  he  drew  those 
sufferings  upon  himself,  and  might  have  escaped  them  by  a  change  of  heart  and  life.  Moses 
and  the  prophets  would  not  have  taught  them  to  throw  away  riches  as  sinful  in  themselves  ; 
the  expression  could  only  apply  to  tlie  rich  man's  pursuit  of  pleasure,  and  want  of  love  fur 
his  neighbour.     (4.)  It  is  true,  nothing  is  said  of  Lazarus's  state  of  heart;  but  then  he  is 


HEROD.  323 

§  220.  Persecutions  tf  Herod  Antipas.  (Luke,  xiii.,  31.) 
Befoi'e  Christ  had  passed  the  border  of  Galilee,  certain  Pharisees 
came  and  advised  him,  with  pretended  anxiety  for  his  safety,  to  leave 
that  region  as  quickly  as  possible,  because  the  king,  Herod  Antipas, 
had  resolved  to  slay  him.  It  is  a  question  w^hether  this  w^ere  really  the 
case,  or  whether  it  was  a  mere  invention  of  the  Pharisees  to  rid  them- 
selves of  Christ's  troublesome  presence.  The  latter  would  have  been 
perfectly  in  keeping  with  their  character.  Herod's  previous  conduct 
certainly  afforded  no  substantial  ground  for  suspicion  ;  at  first  he  seems 
to  have  been  actuated  by  mere  curiosity  to  see  a  man  of  whose  deeds 
so  much  was  said,  and  to  witness  one  of  his  miracles  (Luke,  ix.,  9) ; 
and  at  a  later  period,  he  was  rejoiced  at  finding  an  opportunity  of  the 
kind  (Luke,  xxiii.,  8).  But,  on  the  other  hand,  had  the  Pharisees  in- 
vented the  story,  Jesus  would  have  levelled  his  reproof  at  them,  and 
not  against  Herod.  It  would  not  have  been  in  harmony  with  his  char- 
acter to  rebuke  them  over  Herod's  shoulders  by  calling  him  a  crafty 
"  fox,"  when  the  epithet  was  intended  for  themselves,  instead  of  tell- 
ing them  directly  that  he  knew  their  cunning  aim  to  drive  him  out  of 
the  country.  Nor  is  it  to  be  supposed  that  the  feelings  and  dispositions 
of  a  man  like  Herod  Antipas  would  not  fluctuate  under  different  influ- 
ences. The  protracted  travels  of  Christ  in  Galilee,  and  the  striking 
effects  of  his  labours,  might  very  naturally  excite  the  fears  and  suspi- 
cions of  Herod,  especially  in  view  of  the  relation  in  which  Christ 
stood  to  John  the  Baptist.  Even  if  he  did  not  really  intend  to  kill  him, 
he  may  have  circulated  such  a  report,  and  thus  sought  to  gain  his  end 
by  getting  him  out  of  Galilee.  This  would  have  been  characteristic 
of  the  "fox,"  as  Jesus  styled  him. 

But  since  Herod's  relations  with  the  Pharisees  were  not  the  most 
friendly,  and  since  he  must  have  known  their  hostility  to  Jesus,  it  is 
not  likely  that  they  were  his  instruments  in  approaching  the  Saviour. 
They  probably  acted  from  motives  of  their  own ;  whether  they  be- 
longed to  the  less  hostile  party,  and  gave  him  the  warning  in  good  faith, 
or  whether,  without  inventing  the  report,  they  used  it  to  get  rid  of  one 
who  so  troubled  them  by  his  reproofs,  and  threatened  to  injure  their 
authority  with  the  people  so  seriously. 

§  221.   Christ's  Words  of  his  Death. 
Christ  answered  the  Pharisees  that  there  was  no  occasion  for  .such 

only  a  foil  to  the  rich  man,  not  the  chief  figure.  Moreover,  the  coutrast  that  is  drawa  be- 
tween him  and  Dives,  and  the  relation  in  which  be  is  made  to  stand  to  Abraham,  indicate 
that  he  was  intended  to  represent  a  i)ious  man,  suffering  during  his  life  on  earth,  and  bear- 
ing his  afflictions  with  religious  resignation.  Perhaps,  in  the  original  form  of  the  parable, 
several  points  were  more  prominently  brought  out  than  they  are  in  the  account  of  it  which 
has  been  transmitted  to  us. 


324  RETURN  THROUGH  SAMARIA. 

craft  and  stratagem ;  he  should  stay  in  Galilee  a  few  days,  but  would 
not  leave  it  sooner;  he  had  nothing  to  fear  during  the  time  fixed  by 
God  for  his  labours  there ;  at  Jemsalcm  was  his  career  to  terminate, 
and  thither  he  should  go  to  meet  his  fate.  "  Go  tell  that  fox,  beJiohl,  I 
cast  out  devils,  and  I  do  cures  to-day  and  to-morrotc  (i.  e.,  but  a  short 
time),  and  the  third  day  (shortly)  /  shall  he  perfected  (find  the  end  of 
my  labours).  Nevertheless,  I  must  go  on  with  my  labours*  to-day  and  to- 
morrow ;^  and  the  day  following  I  go  away,  for  it  cannot  he  that  a  proph- 
et perish  out  of  Jerusalemy\ 

The  extent  of  this  last  declaration  may  appear  strange,  as  John  the 
Baptist,  whom  Christ  called  the  greatest  of  prophets,  did  perish  out  of 
Jerusalem.  But  obviously  he  did  not  mean  to  express  a  general  and 
inevitable  law,  but  only  to  characterize  strikingly  the  persecuting  spirit 
of  the  hierarchical  party  in  the  metropolis,  to  which  the  witnesses  of 
the  truth  must  always  fall  victims.  And  although  Jerusalem  itself  was 
not  the  seat  of  John's  labours,  still  the  city — i.  c.,  the  ruling  party 
there — was  the  cause  of  his  death.§ 

§  221.  Journey  continued  through  Samaria.     (Luke,  x\'ii.,  11,  seq.J — 

Inhospitality  of  certain  Sa?naritans. — Displeasure  of  the  Disciples. 

(Luke,  ix.,  54.) — Ingratitude  of  Nine  Jewish  Lepers  that  tvere  Healed. 

— Gratit2ide  of  the  Samaritan  Ijcper.     (Luke,  xvii.,  15,  16.) 

Christ  determined,  in  this  his  last  journey,  to  pass  through  Samaria, || 

as  he  had  done  on  his  first  return  from  the  Feast  of  Passover.     The 

seventy  disciples  prepared  his  way  among  the  Samaritans.     A  few  of 

them  met  with  a  bad  reception  at  a  certain  place  ;  the  people  refused 

*  To  give  a  complete  sense  to  v.  33,  we  must  (with  the  Pcschito)  insert  fpydltadai,  or 
some  like  word,  after  avpiov.  _ 

t  This  is  by  no  means  a  mere  repetition ;  the  preceding  verse  says  what  u  done ;  this, 
what  must  be  done  :  iu  nt — implying  a  ruling  Providence.  "  Do  not  think  that  any  human 
power  can  shorten  my  ministrj' ;  it  is  the  Divine  will  that  I  work  here  a  short  time,  and 
then  go  to  end  my  earthly  career  at  Jerusalem." 

t  The  verses  following  (34,  35)  are  found,  also,  in  Matt.,  xxiii.,  37-39.  The  question  is,  to 
which  place  do  they  originally  belong  ?  Both  the  place  and  time  given  by  Matthew  ap- 
pear entirely  suitable,  and  the  connexion  between  verses  34,  3.5  (Luke),  appears  to  prove 
that  the  words  were  spoken  ai  Jerusalem.  It  may  be  said  that  i  oikos  i'lxtov  does  not  ne 
cessarily  designate  the  Temple  ;  and  hence  that  Jesus  might  have  used  the  words  when 
leaving  Galilee ;  but,  in  fact,  he  was  not  leaving  that  country,  but  said  expressly  that  he 
would  remain  a  little  time  longer.  On  the  whole,  therefore,  we  adopt  the  connexion  in 
Matthew  as  the  original  one.  The  affinity  between  verses  33  and  34  in  Luke  may  have 
Icil  to  the  insertion  of  the  passage  in  this  place.  §  Cf.  p.  179. 

y  As  all  that  is  found  in  this  part  of  Luke's  Gospel  does  not  refer  to  one  journey,  it  is 
possible  that  Luke,  ix.,  52,  belongs  to  a  separate  one.  We  place  it  in  this  later  period  from 
the  "messengers"  (v.  52),  which  we  take  to  allude  to  the  Seventy,  and  from  the  confidence 
of  the  Apostles  in  the  efficacy  of  their  prayer  (v.  54),  which  implies  that  tiiey  were  at  that 
time  organs  of  miraculous  power.  The  mention  iu  verse  53  of  the  sending  out  of  messen- 
gers, without  express  allusion  to  the  Seventy,  taken  in  connexion  with  the  fact  that  this 
is  a  fragmentary  accouut,  separate  from  the  narrative  of  the  mission  of  the  Seventy,  serves 
to  confirm  the  veracity  of  the  latter. 


THE  TEN  LEPERS.  325 

to  entertain  tliem  and  their  Master  because  they  were  going  to  the 
Feast  at  Jerusalem.  James  and  John,  the  sons  of  Zebedee,  with  a  zeal 
not  yet  sufficiently  tempered  by  love — probably  relying  on  the  miracu- 
lous powers  intrusted  to  them  by  Christ — said  to  him,  "-Lord,  wilt  thou 
that  we  command  fire  from  heaven  and  consume  them,.,  even  as  Elias 
did  ?"  But  he  rebuked  them  with  the  question,  "  Know  ye  not  with 
what  temper  of  mind*  ye  ought,  as  representatives  of  my  spirit,  to  be 
actuated  1"     And  they  went  to  another  village. 

In  the  case  just  mentioned  the  Samaritans  were  in  fault,  and  their 
conduct  tended  to  strengthen  the  Jewish  prejudice  of  the  disciples 
ao"ainst  them.f  But  another  soon  occurred  in  which  Samaritan  grati- 
tude was  made  use  of  by  the  Saviour  to  counteract  that  prejudice.| 

On  the  outskirts  of  a  village  ten  lepers  met  him,  nine  of  whom  were 
Jews,  and  the  tenth  a  Samaritan.  Shut  out  in  common  from  the. fel- 
lowship of  men,  they  forgot  their  national  hatred  in  their  sufferings, 
and  banded  together.  Not  daring,  as  lepers,  to  approach  the  Saviour, 
they  stood  afar  off  and  called  for  help.  They  were  healed,  but  not  im- 
mediately ;  Christ  telling  them  to  show  themselves  to  the  priests  for  in- 
spection. Of  all  the  ten,  only  the  Samaritan  came  back  to  thank  Christ, 
and  in  him  God,  for  the  grace  of  healing.§ 

The  Saviour  drew  the  attention  of  the  disciples  to  the  susceptible 
mind  of  the  thankful  Samaritan,  in  conti'ast  with  the  dulness  of  heart 


*  Namely,  not  to  call  judgments  down  upon  the  enemies  of  the  kingdom,  but  to  seek 
their  salvation;  the  spirit  of  love  and  mercy,  sympathizing  with  those  that  err  from  mista- 
ken zeal;  as  Jesus  himself  had  distinguished  the  sin  against  the  Son  of  Man  from  that 
against  the  Holy  Ghost.  Cf  p.  227,  243.  They  should  have  known  that  his  miracles  were 
designed  to  bless,  not  to  punish.     Cf.  p.  134. 

t  The  absence  of  any  allusion  here  to  Christ's  former  reception  among  the  Samaritans 
proves  nothing  against  the  veracity  of  tlio  narrative  ;  it  only  illustrates  the  mamier  in 
which  the  synoptical  Gospels  were  compiled. 

X  Of  course  we  do  not  pretend  to  prove  that  this  event  (Luke,  xvii.,  11)  necessarily  falls 
in  the  chronological  place  in  which  we  give  it. 

§  There  are  several  obscurities  in  the  narrative.  At  what  point  did  the  Samaritan  turn 
hack  (v.  1.5)  ?  Schleiermacker  supposes  that  it  was  not  until  after  the  lepers  had  been  de- 
t;lared  to  be  healed  by  the  priest,  and  had  brought  the  usual  sacrifices  ;  that  the  Jew's  migkt 
have  expected  to  meet  Christ  at  the  feast  in  Jerusalem  and  thank  him  there  ;  but  the  other, 
following  the  Samaritan  sense  of  the  Mosaic  law,  went  to  the  Temple  of  Gerizim,  and 
therefore  could  not  expect  to  meet  him  again.  Had  this  been  the  case,  Christ  would  not 
have  praised  him  to  the  disadvantage  of  the  others,  merely  because  his  gratitude,  without 
being  greater,  was  sooner  expressed.  This  being  inadmissible,  let  us  suppose  the  case 
thus :  tiie  Samaritan,  from  intercourse  with  Jews,  had  imbibed  Jewish  opinions,  and  ad- 
mitted the  authority  of  their  prophets,  so  far,  at  least,  as  to  apply  the  law  in  their  sense ; 
in  fact,  it  appears  from  the  account  that  all  tlie  ten  went  together.  But  his  ardent  grati- 
tude could  not  wait  for  Christ's  arrival  at  Jerusalem;  and  as  soon  as  he  had  the  priest's 
ctrtificate,  he  hurried  back  to  meet  Jesus — who  travelled  slowly— on  the  way,  and  express 
his  thanks.  But  the  sense  which  naturally  flows  from  Luke's  words  is  also  the  most  prob- 
alde  in  itself;  the  lepers  found  themselves  healed  soon  after  leaving  the  village,  and  the 
Samaritan,  full  of  gratitude,  hastened  back  to  give  utterance  to  it. 


326  CHRIST  AT  JERUSALEM. 

shown  by  the  Jews.     This  simple  example  was,  in  fact,  a  type  of  the 
conduct  of  multitudes* 


CHAPTER  XIII. 


CHRIST'S  STAY  AT  JERUSALEM  DURING  THi:  FEAST  OF  THE 
DEDICATION. 

§  223.  His  Statement  of  the  Proof  of  las  'Messlalisliip'. — His  Oneness 

with  the  Father. — He  defends  his  Words  from  the  Old  Testament. 

(John,  X.,  22-39.) 

N  the  month  of  December  Christ  arrived  at  Jerusalem  to  attend  the 
Feast  of  the  Dedication.  As  he  had  not  always  alike  openly 
declared  himself  to  be  Messiah,  he  was  asked,  while  walking  in  Solo- 
mon's Porch,  by  certain  Jews,  "How  long  wilt  thou  hold  us  in  susi^cnse? 
If  thou  he  the  Christ,  tell  us  plainly.^''  We  do  not  know  by  whom,  oi- 
in  what  spirit,  this  question  was  asked.  In  view  of  the  prevalent  no- 
tions of  the  Jews  in  respect  to  the  nature  of  Messiah's  kingdom,  we 
may  readily  imagine  that  persons  not  entii'ely  hostile  might  complain 
of  the  uncertainty  in  which  they  were  held.  Probably,  however, 
among  those  who  put  the  question  were  some  that  had  no  other  object 
than  to  use  his  answer  to  his  disadvantage.  Whoever  they  were,  it  is 
clear  that  they  had  no  just  ideas  of  Christ's  ministry  or  of  his  relations 
to  mankind ;  and,  therefore,  no  further  explanation  than  that  which 
his  words  and  deeds  had  already  afforded  could  have  been  of  use  to 
them. 

He,  therefore,  replied,  "  I  told  you,  and  yo  believed  not.  What  use 
to  repeat  it  1  There  is  no  need  of  telling  you  in  express  terms.  You 
might  have  known  it  from  the  (objective)  testimony  of  my  works,  had 
you  been  so  disposed.  The  works  that  I  do  in  my  Father's  name,  they 
bear  witness  of  me.  But  you  lack  faith  ;  and  you  lack  it  because  you 
are  not  of  my  sheep  (your  spirit  excludes  you  from  my  fellowship). 
M.I)  sheept  hear  my  voice,  and  I  know  them,  and  they  follow  me ;  and 

*  lu  the  narrative  the  miracle  holds  a  subordinate  place ;  the  prominent  feature  is  the 
couti'ast  between  the  thankfulness  of  the  Samaritan  and  the  ingratitude  of  the  Jews  ;  and 
this  fact  alone  testifies  to  its  veracity  in  respect  to  the  miracle  itself  The  attempts  that 
have  been  made  to  impugn  it,  or  to  show  that  it  was  originally  a  pai'ablc,  are  futile  ;  it 
bears  no  mark  of  improbability,  and  its  position  in  the  historical  account  of  the  journey  \» 
perfectly  natural.  A  narrator  of  events  naturally  gives  prominence  to  those  points  in 
which  his  own  mind  is  most  interested,  and  throws  others  comparatively  into  the  back 
ground;  so  that  many  things  may  appear  wanting  in  his  statements  to  readers  who  wish 
to  fonn  for  themselves  a  perfect  image  of  the  transactions.  But  this  certainly  is  no  ground 
for  supposing  all  the  rest  to  be  mere  inrcntion.  This  much  against  Hast,  who  expresses 
himself,  however,  with  uncertainty,  and  opposes  Strauss. 

t  If  this  alludes  to  the  parable  of  the  Good  Shepherd,  and  the  words  >.o0uf  inav  v,Civ  (v. 


"I  AND  MY  FATHER  ARE  ONE."  327 

I  grant  unto  them  eternal  life  ;  and  they  shall  never  perish,  neither 
ehall  any  man  pluck  them  out  of  my  hand  (/.  c,  ray  protecting  care,  un- 
der which  they  will  reach,  in  safety,  the  full  enjoyment  of  eternal  life). 
My  Father,  who  gave  them  to  me,  is  the  Almighty ;  and  no  power  of 
the  world  can  pluck  them  from  the  hand  of  Omnipotence.  Through 
me,  they  are  united  with  the  Almighty  Father;  land  the  Father  are 
oner 

"We  understand  by  the  "  oneness"  here  spoken  of  the  oneness  of 
Christ  with  the  Father  in  will  and  works,  in  virtue  of  which  his  work 
is  the  work  of  the  Father ;  but  this  was  founded  on  the  consciousness 
of  his  original  and  essential  oneness  with  the  Father,  as  is  clear  from 
his  testimonies  in  other  places  as  to  his  relations  to  God.  In  and  of 
itself  the  language  of  Christ  contained  nothing  that  might  not  have  been 
said  from  the  stand-point  of  the  Jewish  idea  of  the  Messiah.  But  the 
hostile  spirits  gladly  seized  the  occasion  to  accuse  him  of  blasphemy, 
and  preparations  were  made  to  stone  him. 

The  rigid,  legal  Monotheism  of  the  Jews  placed  an  infinite  and  im- 
passable gulf  between  God  and  the  creature  ;  and  they,  therefore,  took 
offence  at  Christ's  words,  especially  at  the  higher  sense  in  which  he 
was  accustomed  to  call  himself  the  Son  of  God.  He  then  sought  to 
prove  to  them,  on  their  own  ground,  that  Messiah  might  call  himself  in 
that  higher  sense  the  Son  of  God,  and  appropriate  the  titles  founded 
thereon,  without  the  slightest  prejudice  to  the  honour  of  God.  "  If," 
said  he,  "in  your  own  law  (Ps.  Ixxxii.,  6)  persons  who,  in  specific  re- 
lations, represent  God  (<?.§-.,  judges  and  kings),  are  called  gods  (D''ri'7N)  ; 
how  much  more,  and  in  how  far  higher  a  sense,  is  the  highest  Theo- 
cratic King  entitled  to  call  himself  the  Son  of  God."  The  Jews  had 
not  directly  taken  offence  at  his  calling  himself  the  Son  of  Gdo,  but  at 
his  saying,  "  I  am  one  with  the  Father  ;"  but  Christ  considered  the  lat- 
ter claim  as  a  necessary  result  of  the  former.*     He  concluded  by  say- 

2f))  are  genuine,  it  might  be  inferred  that  this  conversation  took  place  shortly  after  the 
other,  and,  therefore,  that  the  journey  to  Galilee  and  back  could  not  have  occuired  between 
them.  But  it  would  not  be  at  aU  decisive  to  that  effect;  Christ  may  have  alluded  to  the 
parable  ft-equently,  and  thus  kept  it  fresh  in  the  memorj'  of  his  hearers. 

*  I  cannot  agree  with  the  views  of  this  argument  which  Strauss  (3'<^' Aufl.,  i.,  536)  has 
'adoj)ted  from  Kern  (Tiibinger  Zeitschrift,  1836,  ii.,  89) :  "Jesus  used  this  line  of  argument 
to  prove  his  right  to  style  himself  the  Sou  of  God  to  persons  who  did  not  admit  his  Messiah- 
ship,  and  who  could  not  be  convinced  by  passages  in  which  Messiah  was  so  called,  that 
hp.  had  a  right  to  apply  the  title  to  himself"  This  is  totally  foreign  to  the  connexion  in 
which  the  argument  is  handed  down  to  us.  The  Jews  were  not  offended  because  Christ 
had  appropriated  a  title  to  which  none  but  Messiah  had  a  right,  but  because  they  believed 
him  to  claim  more  than  any  creature  could.  It  was  not  his  Messiahship  that  was  in  ques- 
tion, but  whether  any  human  being  could  place  himself  in  such  relations  to  God  without 
prejudice  to  the  Divine  honour.  Christ's  concluding  sentence  (v.  36)  implied  that  if  any 
one  could  appropriate  such  a  title,  it  was  much  more  the  privilege  of  one  hallowed  by  God, 
and  sent  by  him  into  the  world,  i.  e.,  of  the  Messiah  ;  thus  presupposing  his  own  Messiah- 


328-  CHRIST  IN  PERvEA. 

ing,  that,  if  they  would  not  believe  his  words,  they  might,  from  his 
works,  know  and  believe  that  He  was  in  the  Father,  and  the  Father  in 
Him. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

JESUS  IN  PERiEA  (BETHABARA). 

§    224.  His  Decision  on  the  Question  of  Divorce. — Celibacy.     (Matt., 
xix,  2-12  ;  Mark,  x.,  3-12.) 

AS  Jesus  could  remain  no  longer  at  Jerusalem  with  safety,  he  re- 
tired for  a  while  into  the  vicinity  of  Bethabara,  in  Peraja,*  where 
he  had  first  ajipeared  pulilicly,  and  where  he  had  always  found,  in  the 
results  of  the  Baptist's  labours,  a  point  of  departure  for  his  own. 
Many  in  that  neighbourhood  were  prepared  to  recognize  Jesus  as  high- 
er than  John,  because  the  latter  had  done  no  such  Divine  works  as  the 
former  daily  performed. 

In  view  of  his  admitted  authority,  weighty  questions  in  theology — at 
least  some  which  were  much  debated  in  the  schools  of  the  time — were 
proposed  to  him  for  solution.  These  questions  were  put  either  to  test 
his  wisdom,  or  because  of  the  confidence  men  had  already  acquired  in 
his  illumination  as  a  prophet.  One  of  them  concerned  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  Mosaic  law  of  divorce,  and  was  chiefly  disputed  between 
the  schools  of  Hillel  and  of  Schammai.  Both  schools  erred  in  con- 
founding the  political  and  juridical  with  the  moral  elements  of  the 
question.t  The  school  of  Hillel  held  that  the  moral  law  of  marriage 
was  satisfied  in  the  Theocratico-political  law  of  Moses  ;  that  of  Scham- 
mai understood  the  demands  of  morality  better,  but  erred  in  interpret- 
ing the  Mosaic  law,  and  in  their  idea  of  the  stand-point  from  which  it 
was  given. 

When  the  question  was  presented  to  Christ  for  decision,  he  separa- 
ted the  two  stand-points — the  moral  and  the  legal — which  had  been 
confounded  by  the  schools  ;  in  substance,  however,  in  the  notion  of 
marriage  itself,  he  agreed  most  with  the  school  of  Schammai.  He  de- 
clared (as  he  had  before  done  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mountf )  that  mar- 
ship.  The  argument  is,  therefore,  rather  a  conclusio  a  ininwi  ad  majus  than,  as  Kern 
thinks,  an  apagogic  one. 

*  John,  X.,  40.  This  brief  stay  in  Pcrffia  is  intimated  also  in  Matt.,  xix.,  1 ;  for  what- 
ever sense  is  put  upon  the  words  ch  rd  npia  rrn  'lomViiuf,  it  is  expressly  said  that  Christ 
went  uipav  roC  'lopSdvov.  What  is  said  in  Mark,  x.,  1,  i.  e.,  that  he  went  through  Perwa  to 
.ludea,  appears  to  conflict  with  the  original  account  of  the  journey,  as  given  in  Luke.  Com 
paring  Matt.,  xix.,  1,  seq.,  and  Mark,  x.,  1,  seq.,  we  infer  that  wliat  is  here  related  took 
jilace  partly  during  Clirist's  stay  in  Peraea,  and  partly  when  he  had  retired  from  Jcnisalcm 
into  Jndea. 

t  Cf  Michaeli.s  on  the  Law  of  Moses,  ii.,  $  l'.JO.  \  Cf  p.  233. 


DIVORCE.  329 

riage  is,  according  to  its  idea,  an  indissoluble  union,  by  which  man  and 
wife  are  joined  into  one  whole,  constituting  but  one  life  ['■'ihcy  twain 
are  one  flesh'"].  As  it  was  his  work  evei;y  where  to  lead  back  all  hu- 
man relations  to  their  original  intention,  so  he  decided  that  the  idea  of 
marriage  represented  in  Genesis,  as  originally  the  basis  of  its  institu- 
tion by  God,  should  be  realized  in  life. 

This  idea  of  marriage  is  not  an  isolated  thing,  separate  from  the 
system  of  life  that  emanated  from  Christ,  but  belongs  to  its  organism 
as  a  whole.  As  Christ  has  restored  in  human  nature  the  image  of  God 
in  its  totality,  so  the  two-fold  ground-form  for  its  exhibition,  denoted 
by  the  opposite  sexes,  must  be  reinstated  in  its  rights — its  ideal  must 
be  realized.  It  is  essential  to  this  that  these  two  ground-forms  fulfil 
their  destiny,  and  become  mutually  complementary  to  each  other  in  a 
higher  unity  of  life,  binding  two  personalities  together ;  and  this  is 
marriage.  It  was  by  Christ,  therefore,  that  the  true  import  of  this  re- 
lation had  to  be  unfolded. 

Having  derived  from  Gen.,  ii.,  24,  the  higher  unity  into  which  two 
persons  of  different  sexes  should  be  joined  by  marriage,  he  drew  the 
following  conclusion  :  "  What,  therefore,  God  (by  the  original  institution 
of  marriage,  by  the  inward  relation  of  the  two  persons  to  each  other, 
and  by  the  leadings  through  which  he  makes  them  conscious  of  it) 
hath  joined  together,  let  not  man  put  asunder  J^  Upon  this  they  asked, 
"  How,  then,  does  this  bear  upon  the  Mosaic  law,  which  admits  of  di- 
vorce 1"  He  replied,  "  Moses,  because  of  the  hardness  of  your  hearts 
(your  rude  and  carnal  condition),  snfl'ered  you  to  put  away  your  wives 
(as  state  laws  do  not  aim  to  realize  moral  ideas  or  to  create  a  moral 
sense,  but  to  bring  about  outivard  civilization,  the  laws  being  adapted 
to  the  stand-point  of  the  natuT-e) ;  but  from  the  beginning  it  was  not  so." 

But  Christianity,  from  its  very  nature,  can  make  no  such  condescen- 
sions. It  is  her  problem  every  where  to  realize  the  ideals  of  the  crea- 
tion ;  a  task  which  the  new  life  imparted  by  God  makes  possible  to 
her.  In  fact,  Christ's  decision  in  this  particular  case  illustrates  the  en- 
tire relation  of  Judaism  to  Christianity  ;  there,  condescension  to  a  rude 
condition  of  the  natural  man,  which  could  not  be  removed  by  outward 
means ;  here,  the  restoration  of  that  which  was  in  the  beginning.  Ju- 
daism, in  a  word,  stood  midway  between  the  original  and  the  renewal. 
(Gal.,  iii.,  19.) 

This  high  idea  of  marriage  was  at  that  time  beyond  the  reach  of  the 
disciples ;  its  indissolubility  appeared  so  hard,  and  the  responsibility 
(if  every  separation  were  adultery)  so  gi-eat,  that  they  said,  in  alarm, 
"  If  the  case  be  so,  it  is  better  not  to  marry  at  all." 

Now  it  is  not  to  be  imagined  that  Christ  would  reply  to  this  only  by 
praising  those  who  were  incapable  of  realizing  the  Christian  idea  of 


330  CHRIST  IN  PER/EA. 

mairiage  and  exalting  the  superiority  (even  though  a  conditional  one) 
of  a  single  life.  We  should  have  expected,  in  accordance  with  his 
usual  mode  of  teaching,  that  he  would  point  out  the  ground  of  their 
ularm  in  the  state  of  their  hearts,  and  show  that  what  appeared  so 
difficult  would  be  made  easy  by  the  power  of  the  Divine  life.  More- 
over, if  he  intended  to  answer  them  only  by  recommending  celibacy, 
he  omitted  precisely  that  which  the  occasion  demanded,  viz.,  the  men- 
tion of  celibacy  arising  from  conscious  inability  to  come  up  to  the  moral 
standai-d  of  marriage.  This  sudden  leap,  from  a  lofty  definition  of  the 
idea  of  marriage  to  a  laudation  of  celibacy,  appears  certainly  unac- 
countable ;  we  must,  therefore,  suppose  that  some  intermediate  part  of 
the  conversation  has  been  omitted.  The  disciples  might  have  inferred, 
from  his  placing  marriage  so  high,  that  it  was  to  be  indispensable,  under 
the  new  covenant,  to  the  manifestation  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  In 
this  respect,  however,  Christ  stood  directly  opposed  to  the  Jewish  stand- 
point, which  absolutely  required  marriage;  he  was  far  from  prescribing 
an  unconditional  form,  binding  under  all  the  manifold  and  diversified 
circumstances  of  life ;  the  kingdom  of  God  could  be  served  under 
various  relations  and  conditions,  and  all  was  to  bend  to  this  object. 

We  must  presume,  therefore,  either  that  (as  is  often  the  case  in 
Matthew's  Gospel)  the  passage  has  been  transferred  from  some  other 
comiexion  to  this ;  or,  if  it  really  belongs  here,  that  the  intermediate 
portions  of  the  conversation  have  not  been  transmitted  to  us. 

Christ's  doctrine  on  celibacy  here  is,  that,  if  it  aim  at  the  glory  of 
God,  it  must,  like  true  marriage,  be  connected  with  the  power  of  con- 
trolling nature.  Such  celibacy,  and  such  only,  does  he  recognize,  as 
implies  the  sacrifice  of  human  feelings  from  love  to  the  kingdom  of 
Gop,  and  for  the  sake  of  rendering  it  more  efficient  service.  Only  in 
this  sense  could  he  have  spoken  of  cehbacy  '•'for  the  kingdom  of  Heaven' s 
.sake  ;"  he  never  used  this  expression  to  denote  fitting  one's  self  for 
the  kingdom  by  a  contemplative  life,  &c.,  but  always  to  denote  a  holy 
activity  in  its  service.  He  condemns  those  who  bury  their  talents  in 
order  to  preserve  them.  But  at  a  time  when  the  outward  spread  of 
the  kingdom  of  God  was  the  chief  object  of  religious  effort,  celibacy, 
for  its  sake  especially,  might  find  place. 

It  is  to  be  carefully  noted  that  Christ  by  no  means  says  "  Blessed 
are  those  who  abstain  from  marriage  for  the  sake  of  the  kino-dom,"  &:c., 
as  if  this,  in  itself,  was  pre-eminently  excellent;  but  simply  describes 
an  existing  state  of  facts :  "  There  are  some  eunuchs.,'''  &c. ;  distinguish- 
ing such  as  adopt  this  mode  of  life  for  the  sake  of  the  kingdom  from 
those  thq.t  either  have  no  choice  in  the  matter,  or  are  actuated  by  otlier 
motives.  His  decision,  therefore,  was  opposed  not  only  to  tlie  old 
Hebrew  notion  that  celibacy  was  ^?(?/-  se  ignominious,  but  also  to  the 
ascetic  doctrine  which  made  it  j)cr  se  a  superior  condition  of  life  ;  a 


THE  CHILD-LIKE  SPIRIT.  331 

doctrine  so  widely  diffused  in  later  times.  It  involves  his  great  prin- 
ciple, that  the  heart  and  disposition  must  be  devoted  to  the  interests  of 
the  kingdom  of  God,  and  for  it  must  voluntarily  modify  all  the  relations 
of  life  as  necessity  may  require. 

§  22;i.  The  Blessing  of  Little  Children.  (Luke,  xviii.,  15-17;  Matt., 
xix.,  13-15  ;  Mark,  x.,  13-16.) 

As  the  Saviour  was  leaving  a  certain  place  in  Pera^a,  where  he  had 
deeply  impressed  the  people,  they  brought  their  little  children  to  re- 
ceive his  blessing.  The  disciples,  unwilling  to  have  him  annoyed, 
turned  them  away.  But  Jesus  called  them  back,  and  said,  "  Suffer  the 
little  children  to  come  unto  me,  and  forbid  them  not ;  for  of  such  is  the 
kingdom  of  Heaven."  He  then  took  them  up  in  his  arms,  laid  his  hand 
upon  them,  and  blessed  them;  adding,  "Whosoever  shall  not  receive 
the  kingdom  of  God  as  a  little  child,  shall  not  enter  therein.''''  These 
words  were  opposed  partly  to  the  idea  still  entertained  by  the  dis- 
ciples (manifested  in  their  deeming  the  approach  of  the  children  incon- 
sistent with  his  dignity),  that  the  glory  of  Messiah  and  his  kingdom 
would  be  outward  ;  and  partly  to  the  self-willed  and  self-seeking  spii'it 
which  debased  their  religious  conceptions  ;  a  spirit  strikingly  exhibited 
in  many  of  their  expressions  during  this  last  period  of  Christ's  labours. 

In  fact,  this  single  saying  expressed  the  whole  nature  of  the  Gospel 
proclaimed  by  Christ.  It  implied  that  he  viewed  the  kingdom  of  Gon 
as  an  invisible  and  spiritual  one,  to  enter  which  a  certain  disposition 
of  heart  was  essential,  viz.,  a  child-like  spirit,  free  from  pride  and  self- 
will,  receiving  Divine  impressions  in  humble  submission  and  conscious 
dependence:  in  a  word,  all  the  qualities  of  the  child,  suffering  itself  tc 
be  guided  by  the  developed  reason  of  the  adult,  are  to  be  illustrated 
in  the  relations  between  man  and  God.*  Without  this  child-like  spirit 
t^ere  can  be  no  religious  faith,  no  religious  life.  On  the  one  hand, 
Christ  rebuked  that  self-confidence  which  expects  a  share  in  the  king- 
dom on  the  ground  of  intellectual  or  moral  worth  ;t  but  on  the  other, 
by  making  children  a  model,  he  recognized  in  them  not  only  the  unde- 
veloped spirit  of  self,  but  also  the  undeveloped  consciousness  of  God, 
striving  after  its  original.  The  whole  transaction  illustrates  the  love 
with  which  Christ  goes  to  meet  the  dawning  sense  of  God  in  human 
nature. 

*  Precisely  tlie  same  spirit  as  was  demandeil  in  the  sayings  of  Christ  alluded  to  on  p. 
225,  Bei], 

t  The  belief  that  reason  is  self-sufficient  would  utterly  unhinge  the  Christian  world,  and 
cause  its  Hfe  to  assume  forms  directly  the  reverse  of  those  which  Christian  principles  have 
created.     It  would,  indeed,  cause  a  contest  of  life  and  death. 


332  CHRIST  IN  PER^A. 

§  226.    Christ's   Conversation  with  the  rich  Ruler  of  the  Synagogue 

{young  man  ?).      (Matt.,  xix.,   16-24 ;    Mark,  x.,   17,  seq. ;    Luke, 

xviii.,  18,  seq.) 

Christ  was  followed  from  the  place  above  mentioned  by  a  ruler*  of 
the  synagogue  whose  mind  had  been  impressed  by  his  words,  and  who 
came  to  ask  what  remained  for  him  to  do  that  he  might  inherit  eternal 
life.  It  is  clear  that  he  was  one  of  the  self-righteous,  and  had  as  yet 
no  just  sense  of  his  legal  deficiencies  and  need  of  redemption.  He 
probably  expected  to  hear  from  the  lips  of  the  great  Teacher  himself 
that  he  had  already  done  all  that  was  requisite  to  secure  eternal  life ; 
or  merely  that  some  additional  exercises  of  piety  were  necessary  ;  he 
himself  being  all  the  time  perfectly  content  with  his  own  moral  condi- 
tion. And  in  this  spirit  he  asked  the  question,  "  Good  Master,  lohat 
shall  I  do  to  inherit  eternal  lifeV 

Cluist  replied,  "  Why  callest  thou  me  good  ?j  none  is  good  save  one, 
that  is,  God."  The  difficulty  which  appears  to  lie  in  these  words,  when 
compared  with  other  declarations  of  Christ  in  regard  to  his  person,  will 
vanish  if  we  keep  in  view  the  general  sense  in  which  the  antithesis  is 
expressed.  God  is  good  in  a  sense  which  can  be  predicated  of  no 
creature.  He  alone  is  the  primal  source  and  cause  of  all  good  in  ra- 
tional beings,  who  are  created  to  be  free  organs  of  his  revelations  of 
himself  (It  is  the  high  import  of  true  morality  that  the  glory  of  God, 
the  only  good  and  holy  one,  is  revealed  in  it.)  Christ  would  not  have 
exhibited,  in  his  character  as  man,  a  model  of  perfect  humility,  had 
he  not  traced  back  to  God  all  the  good  liiat  was  in  him.  But  in  the 
instance  before  us  he  doubtless  had  a  special  reason  for  answering 
thus ;  in  any  other  case  he  might  have  allowed  the  title  to  be  applied 

*  According  to  Luke  an  ap\wi',  which  might  also  rneau  "  a  member  of  the  Sanhedrito ;" 
but  as  Christ  was  at  Peraea,  it  was  more  probably  "  a  ruler  of  the  synagogue."  Accord- 
ing to  Matthew,  he  was  a  "  young  man,"  which  does  not  suit  very  well  with  his  aiTogant 
language  "All  these  have  I  kept  from  my  youth  up."  It  is  true,  the  words  ck  vtoTtjTos  nov 
are  wanting  in  Cod.  Vatic,  but  the  authorities  for  retaining  them  preponderate  ;  their 
omission  may  have  been  caused  by  the  very  discrepancy  to  which  we  allude.  Although  it 
cannot  be  said  to  be  entirely  improbable  that  he  was  a  youth,  yet  the  whole  tone  of  dis- 
course appears  to  imply  that  he  was  advanced  in  years,  and  had  a  self-righteous  couKdeuce 
founded  on  a  life  blameless  from  his  youth  up. 

t  Lachmann  reads,  ti  ne.  ipiiirai  mp\  rod  dyadov  :  tis  eauv  b  ayaOoi.  Even  if  this  be  the  true 
reading,  De  Wctte's  explanation,  which  seems  to  me  to  conflict  with  the  whole  teaching  of 
Christ,  by  no  means  follows  from  it.  It  may  be  thus  interpreted  :  "  Why  do  you  ask  me 
about  what  is  good  ?  There  is  one  who  is  good,  and  to  him  thou  must  go  to  learn  what  is 
good ;  and  he  has,  in  fact,  revealed  it  to  thee."  (Mailer,  Lehre  v.  d.  Suiide,  p.  80,  gives,  as 
the  thought  expres.sed  in  the  passage,  "that  only  from  communion  with  him  who  alone  is 
good  can  the  created  spirit  receive  the  good  ;"  thus  making  the  sense  about  the  same  as 
in  the  common  reading.)  '•  Thou  couldst  then  answer  the  question  for  thyself  But  since 
thou  askest  me,  then  know,"  &c.  But  Laclmiann's  reading  of  the  reply  has  not  the  air  of 
originaKty ;  it  was,  perhaps,  invented  because  Christ's  declining  the  epithet  "  good  "  was 
a  stumbling-block. 


THE  RICH  RULER.  333 

to  him  without  incurring  the  charge  of  self-deification.  Wc  infer  this 
from  the  fact  of  the  answer  itself,  and  also  from  the  conduct  of  the 
questioner.  The  Saviour,  looking  into  his  heart,  saw  that  he  was 
vainly  trusting  in  his  own  morality,  and  was  most  of  all  lacking  in  hu- 
mility ;  and  it  was  precisely  these  defects  which  Christ  suggested  to 
him,  by  declining  for  himself  the  epithet  "  good." 

In  regard  to  the  subsequent  words  of  Christ  two  suppositions  are 
possible.  (1.)  The  first  would  run  as  follows  :  Jesus  did  not  at  once 
answer  the  ruler's  question,  but  put  to  him  another,  viz.,  whether  he 
had  kept  the  commandments,  /.  e.,  in  their  literal  and  outward  sense,* 
without  special  reference  to  the  law  of  love.  He  could  not,  of  course, 
mean  that  this  would  secure  eternal  life;  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount 
had  already  demanded  a  higher  and  purer  obedience.  Thus  far  he 
only  described  the  lower  stand-point — that  of  a  justitia  civilis  ;  with 
the  intention  to  follow  it  up  with  the  declaration  (contained  in  v.  22) 
that  such  a  fulfilment  would  not  suffice  to  gain  eternal  life ;  that  one 
thing  higher  was  still  lacking.  (2.)  The  second  interpretation,  and 
the  one  to  which  our  own  opinions  incline,  is  as  follows :  Christ  an- 
swers (Matt.,  xix.,  17),  "i/'  thou  loilt  enter  into  life,  keep  the  com- 
mandments ;*'  implying,  doubtless,  a  true  fulfilment  of  the  law  as  rep- 
resenting the  holiness  of  God,  and,  therefore,  presupposing  the  ex- 
istence of  the  all-essential  love  in  the  specific  duties  mentioned  (v. 
IS,  19).  But  it  is  clear  that  Christ  did  not  presuppose  that  the  ruler 
had  kept  the  commandments  in  this  sense  ;  on  the  contrary,  seeing  his 
wilful  self-righteousness,  he  adapted  his  answers  thereto,  to  make  him 
conscious  how  far  he  was  from  that  true  obedience  which  is  requisite 
for  inheriting  the  kingdom.  He  thus  gives  the  man  occasion  himself 
to  express  his  self-righteousness  :  ^^  All  these  have  I  kept  from  my  youth 
npy  When  he  adds,  "  What  lack  I  yet  V  Jesus  tells  him  the  one 
thing  necessary  :t  "  Exchange  thine  earthly  wealth  for  heavenly  treas- 
ure (the  highest  treasure,  a  share  in  the  kingdom  of  God,  which  none 
can  secure  but  those  who  hold  all  other  treasures  as  valueless  in  com- 
parison with  it) ;  give  thy  goods  to  the  poor,  and  come  and.folloio  me!" 

*  As  quoted  Luke,  xviii.,  20. 

f  It  is  a  question  wliether  the  form  given  by  Luke  is  not  that  which  most  accurately 
expresses  Christ's  meaning'.  Matthew  has  it,  "  If  thou  wilt  be  perfect ;"  but  even  here 
could  not  be  intended  a  perfection  superior  to  the  fulfilment  of  the  law  ;  for.  according  to  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  there  can  be  no  higher  perfection  ;  and,  moreover,  the  subsequent  ex- 
pressions of  the  disciples  show  that  they  understood  Christ  to  specify  a  state  of  heart  which 
all  must  possess  in  order  to  secure  eternal  life.  A  misunderstanding  of  this  conversation 
of  Christ  gave  rise  to  a  distinction  between  the  fulfilment  of  the  law,  i.  e.,  the  performance 
of  duty,  and  moral  peifection  ;  which  has  been  a  fmitful  source  of  error  ever  since  the  first 
ages  of  Christianity.  Clement  of  Alexandria  understood  and  explained  the  passage  more 
correctly;  not  so  much  in  his  beautiful  treatise  "Qttis  Dives  Salv.,"  as  in  his  Strom.,  iii., 
449.  He  says  on  Matt.,  xix.,  21 :  ^AtyX"  '''iv  Kax>x<iy^t.vov  M  r^  vdaai  rd;  ivro'SaS  Ik  vcorriroS 
TiTtipriKctai,  oil  yap  -m-rrXripuiKct  to  '  dyaTTi^fffif  rdv  nXrjalov  dij  lavrdv '  totc  ie  biri  Tov  Kvpiov  cvvTeXcio- 
Vfievof,  iiildaKZTo  6i'  uyuViji'  licraStiovat.  , 


334  CHRIST  AT  PETRiE. 

Christ  commands  him  to  follow,  just  as  he  was,  without  delaying  to 
care  for  his  possessions;  expressing,  in  this  particular  command,  the 
general  thought:  "  The  one  thing  which  thou  lackest,  and  without  which 
none  can  enter  into  eternal  life,  is  the  denial  of  thyself  and  of  the  world, 
making  eveiy  thing  subordinate  to  the  interests  of  the  Divine  kingdom."' 
He  chose  the  particular  form,  instead  of  the  general  rule,  in  order  tt* 
corr\ince  the  rich  man  of  his  lack  the  more  strikingly,  by  jjointing  out 
his  weakest  side ;  for  he  clung  to  his  wealth  with  his  whole  heart ;  to 
teach  him,  from  his  own  experience  of  his  love  of  the  world,  how  far  he 
was  from  possessing  that  love  which  is  the  essence  of  obedience  to  the 
law.* 

§  227.  The  Danger  of  Wealth.  (Matt.,  xix.,  22,  seq. ;  Mark,  x.,  22, 
seq. ;    Luke,  xviii.,  23,  seq.) 

The  rich  man,  incapable  of  the  sacrifice  demanded  of  him,  went 
away  in  perplexity ;  and  Christ  said  to  the  disciples,  "By  this  example 
you  may  see  how  hard  it  is  for  the  rich  to  enter  the  kingdom  of  Heaven;" 
and  then  he  employed  a  figure  by  which,  indeed,  it  appears  to  be  im- 
possible :  "It  is  easier  for  a  camel, ^^  &c.  Nor  is  this  to  be  interpreted 
as  a  hyperbole;  the  words  of  v.  26,  "  With  vicn  this  is  iinjioisihle  [i.  c,  to 
unassisted  human  nature) ;  but  with  God  all  tilings  are  possible,"  show 
that  Christ  meant  to  say  that  it  is  impossible  to  the  unaided  powers 
of  man,  before  he  has  partaken  of  that  higher  life  which  alone  can 
destroy  the  love  of  self  and  of  the  world,  vSome  of  the  hearers  were 
amazecj  at  Christ's  saying,  and  exclaimed,  in  alarm,  "-Who,  then,  can 
be  saved?"  i 

If  this  exclamation  were  made  by  any  of  the  Apostles,  it  must  appear 
strange  ;  they  had  no  wealth  to  absorb  their  affections  ;  and  had,  in  fact, 
made  the  very  sacinfice  demanded.  But  if  we  suppose  th^t  they  did 
make  it,  they  probably  took  Christ's  words  in  a  general  sense — in  which 
they  would  be  as  applicable  to  the  poor  as  to  the  rich — as  implyinir 

*  If  we  compare  with  tliis  narrative,  as  given  in  our  Gospels,  that  form  of  it  whah 
appears  in  the  Evaiig.  ad  Ilcbrmos,  we  can  see  that  the  latter  is  a  later  revision,  from  the 
way  in  which  some  points  arc  contracted  and  others  unhistorically  dilated ;  c.  g.,  Christ, 
instead  of  throwing  out  a  single  thought  to  excite  the  man's  mind,  gives  him  at  once  a  full 
explanation  (though  a  correct  one).  "Dixit  ad  cvm  alter  divitvvi  (whether  several  rich 
men  were  mentioned  in  the  original  tradition,  or  this  was  a  piece  of  invention)  magister. 
quid  bonum  faciens  vivam  ?  Dixit  ei:  Homo,  leges  et  prophctas  fac  (an  imitation  nl 
Christ's  saying  that  '  in  love  both  the  law  and  the  prophets  are  fulfilled').  Respondit  ad 
r.um:  feci.  Dixit  ei  ■•  vadc,  vende  omnia  qine.  posnides,  et  divide  puuperilmg  et  vent,  sequere 
)ne.  Capit  autem  dives  scalpere  cajmt  stium  (clearly  enough  a  little  colouring  matter 
thrown  in;  although  such  graphic  features  are  not  alwaj's  a  mai-k  of  spuriousness ;  their 
character  will  generally  decide  the  point.  In  this  instance  the  fancy  is  apparent).  Kt 
dixit  ad  cum  Doniuus  :  Qiivniodo  dicis  :  legem  feci  et  prophctas,  qtioniam  scriptum  est  in. 
lege:  diiiges  praximnm  tuiim  sicut  te  ipsum,  et  cere,  multifratres  tui.fUi  Abrahiv,  aviiciti 
vml  siereore,  moricntes  pnc  fame  et  dvmus  tua  plena  est  multis  bonis  ct  non  egredittir 
otnnino  aliquid  ex  ea  ad  cos." 


REIGNING  WITFI  CHRIST.  335 

total  renunciation  of  eaithly  things.  Yet  Peter's  question,  v.  27,  does 
not  accord  very  well  with  this  supposition.  It  is  also  very  possible  that 
the  persons  referred  to  in  the  passage  did  not  belong  to  the  number  of 
the  Apostles.* 

"  The  things,'"  said  Christ,  "■which  arc  impossible  with  men  are  jiossi- 
hle  ivith  God."  What  man  cannot  do  by  his  unaided  powers,  he  can 
accomplish  by  the  power  of  (tod.  By  enunciating  this  truth  as  the 
result  of  his  whole  course  of  remark,  he  showed  its  point  of  departure 
and  its  aim.  While  the  rest  stood,  as  it  were,  stupified,  Peter  ventured 
to  say,  "  Does  what  you  have  said  apply  to  us  1  Lo,  we  have  left  all 
and  folloived  thee."]  Then  uttered  the  Saviour  those  words,  so  full  of 
consoling  promise  :  "  There  is  no  man  that  hatli  left  liouse,  or  farents, 
or  brethren,  or  loife,  or  children  for  the  kingdoyi  of  God's  sake,  who  shall 
not  receive  manifold  more  in  this  present  time,  and  in  the  world  to  come 
life  everlasting.''''  The  first  part  of  the  promise  (referring  to  this  life) 
was  enough  to  show  even  those  whose  minds  were  filled  with  carnal 
and  Chiliastic  expectations,  that  the  whole  was  to  be  taken,  not  literally, 
but  spiritually ;  Christians  were  to  receive  back  all  that  they  had  sacri- 
•  ficed,  increased  and  glorified,  in  the  communion  of  the  higher  life  on 
earth.  The  second  part  expressed  the  common  inheritance  of  believr 
crs — everlasting  life  in  heaven. 

§  228.  Believers  are  to  Reign  with  Christ. 
Matthew  mentions  in  this  connexion  (xix.,  28)  the  promise  of  Christ 
to  his  disciples,  that,  when  the  Son  of  Man  should  appear  with  domin- 
ion corresponding  to  his  glory  in  the  renewed  and  glorified  world,  they 
should  "*/^  upon  twelve  thrones,  judging  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel.'" 
The  word  "judging"  includes  the  idea  of  "governing,"  according  to 
its  ancient  acceptation.  The  collocation  of  this  passage  may  be  one  of 
those  instances  in  whicli  Matthew  arranges  his  matter  more  according 
to  the  connexion  of  thought  than  of  time ;  but  there  is  no  reason  to 
ijuestion  its  originality.  The  idea  of  a  participation  of  believers  witii 
(Jhrist  in  the  government  and  judgment  of  the  future  world  is  bound 
up  with  the  whole  mode  of  representing  the  kingdom  of  God  in  the 
New  Testament;!  our  duty  must  be  to  separate  the  idea  fi'om  its 
symbolical  form  derived  from  the  old  Theocratic  mode  of  thought,  and 
to  recognize  the  new  Spirit  that  was  to  be  developed  from  it.  The 
passage  (like  the  other  promises  in  the  context)  recognizes  degrees  in 
the  share  of  government  and  judgment  allotted  to  believers.     Not  only 

*  Luke,  xviii.,  2G,  sapports  this. 

t  The  fonn  of  the  question  of  Peter  given  by  Matthew  (xix.,  27)  implies  a  looking  for 
reward  on  his  part.  But  had  this  been  his  object  iu  putting  it,  Christ  would  have  more 
emphatically  reproved  it. 

t  Cf.  p.  225.  Various  passages  of  Paul  (1  Cor.,  vi.,  2,  &c.)  presuppose  such  sayings  of 
Christ. 


336  CHRIST  IN  BETHANY. 

the  Head,  but  also  all  the  organs  of  the  kingdom  of  God  are  to  share 
in  its  dominion  ;  because  its  dominion  is  to  be  universal.  This  is  an 
important  idea  for  Christian  ethics.  There  are  to  be  "judges"  and 
"judged,"  "  rulers"  and  "  ruled" — but  in  an  exalted  sense — in  the  new 
form  of  the  Theocracy  as  well  as  in  the  old 


CHAPTER  XV. 

JESUS   IN    BETHANY. 

§  229.    The  Family  of  Lazarus. — Martha  and  Mary  ;  their  different 
Te?idencies.     (Luke,  x.,  38,  seq.) 

A  PRESSING  call  induced  Christ  to  leave  Persea,  where  he  found 
so  susceptible  a  soil,  perhaps  sooner  than  he  would  otherwise 
have  done. 

About  a  mile  and  a  half  from  Jerusalem,  at  the  foot  of  the  Mount  of 
Olives,  lay  the  village  of  Bethany,  where  dwelt  a  family,  two  sisters 
and  a  brother,  with  whom  Christ  had  formed,  during  his  repeated  and 
protracted  visits  to  the  city,  a  close  and  affectionate  intimacy.  Luk(; 
has  left  us  a  description  of  this  family  agreeing  perfectly  (without  de- 
sign or  concert)  with  that  given  by  John*  (xi.,  1-5).  On  one  occasion, 
when  Christ  was  partaking  of  their  hospitality,  one  of  the  sisters,  Mar- 
tha, showed  more  anxiety  to  provide  for  the  bodily  comforts  of  her  ex- 
alted guest,  and  to  give  him  a  worthy  reception,  than  to  secure  the 
blessings  for  her  soul  which  his  presence  so  richly  offered  ;  while  her 
more  spiritual  sister,  Mary,  gave  herself  wholly  to  listening  to  the 
words  of  life  from  the  lips  of  the  Saviour.  Martha,  finding  all  the 
cares  of  the  family  thrown  upon  her,  complained  to  Jesus  thereof;  and 
he  made  use  of  the  occasion  to  impress  upon  her  mind  the  general 

*  The  passage  in  John  probably  refers  to  the  earlier  period  of  this  intimacy.  It  is  true, 
Lake  (x.,  38)  does  not  mention  the  name  of  the  village ;  the  account  transmitted  to  him 
probably  did  not  contain  it,  and  here,  as  in  other  cases,  he  would  not  insert  the  name 
merely  for  the  sake  of  giving  definitcuess  to  the  narrative.  The  event  itself,  as  a  very  sitr- 
nificant  one,  had  been  faithfully  kept  aiid  transmitted  ;  the  locality,  being  unimportant  to 
the  interest  of  the  event,  was  probably  forgotten.  It  is  true,  the  position  of  the  passage, 
in  the  account  of  Christ's  last  journey  to  Jerusalem,  might  lead  to  the  inference  that  the 
place  was  at  some  distance  from  the  city  ;  but,  as  wc  have  already  said,  the  account  itself 
mingles  two  journeys  together,  as  is  especially  evident  in  the  single  case  before  ns.  De 
Welle  has  remarked  this.  Luke  simply  adhered  to  the  account  he  had  received,  which 
gave  him  no  information  about  tiie  locality;  this  last  we  must  learn  from  John.  The  prob- 
abilities, in  regard  to  time,  are  favourable  to  our  supposition.  The  undesigned  coinci- 
dence, therefore,  of  John  with  Luke,  in  the  description  of  the  family,  &c.,  is  a  strong  proof 
of  credibility.  Hlrnusx,  however,  adduces  Luke's  silence  in  regard  to  Lazarus  ns  invali- 
dating John's  credibility,  but  without  the  slightest  reason ;  Luke's  object  was  to  make 
prominent  the  relation  of  the  two  sisters  to  Christ,  and  the  mention  of  Lazarus  was,  there- 
fore, not  at  all  necessary. 


MARY  AND  xMARTHA.  337 

truth  which  he  so  often,  and  under  so  many  diversified  forms,  taught  to 
his  hearei's  :  "Martha,  thou  art  careful  and  troubled  about  7nany  things, 
but  one  thing  is  needful  ;*  and  Mary  hath  chosen  that  good  part  (that 
which  is  good  in  itself;  the  only  worthy  aim  of  human  effort),  which 
shall  not  be  taken  from  her  (a  possession  that  shall  be  everlasting,  not 
perishable,  like  these  worldly  things)." 

It  is  wholly  contrary  to  the  sense  of  history  to  interpret  this  narra- 
tive [as  some  do]  so  as  to  make  Martha  represent  the  practical  and 
Mary  the  contemplative  tendency,  and  thence  to  infer  that  Christ  as- 
cribes superiority  to  the  latter.  The  antithesis  is  between  that  turn  of 
mind  which  forgets,  in  a  multiplicity  of  objects,  the  one  fundamental 
aim  ;  and  that,  on  the  other  hand,  which  devotes  itself  solely  to  the  one 
object  from  which  all  others  should  proceed.  Christ  demands  of  his 
followers  constant  activity  in  his  service,  and  therefore  could  not  have 
approved  an  entirely  contemplative  spirit.  What  he  honours  in  Mary 
is  the  spirit  which  ought  to  be  the  centre  and  animating  principle  of 
all  activity.  It  is  true,  Martha  is  more  practical  and  worldly ;  Mary 
more  contemplative  and  spiritual ;  but  these  manifestations  do  not  ne- 
cessarily indicate  character;  although  in  this  instance  (and,  indeed,  com- 
monly) the  manifestation  corresponds  to  the  character.  It  was  not  ne- 
cessary that  Martha's  multiplied  cares  should  distract  her  from  the  one 
thing  needful ;  Christ  blamed  her,  not  for  her  cares,  but  for  not  makinn- 
them  subordinate  :  for  so  surrendering  herself  to  them  as  to  put  the 
greater  interest  in  the  back-ground. 

§230.  The  Sickness  of  Lazarus ;  Christ's  Reply  to  the  Messengers 
who  informed  him  of  it.     (John,  xi.,  1-4.) 

While  Christ  was  in  Peraea,  about  a  day's  journey  from  Bethany, 
Lazarus,  the  brother  of  Martha  and  Mary,  was  taken  sick,  and  the 
sisters  sent  to  inform  the  Saviour  of  it,  doubtless  in  the'hope  of  obtain- 
ing his  assistance.  His  reply  gave  this  consolation,  at  least,  to  the  sis- 
ters— that  their  brother  should  not  be  separated  from  them  by  death  ; 
although  its  true  import  was  not  obvious  until  afterward :  "  This  sick- 
ness is  not  unto  death,  but  for  the  glory  of  God,  that  the  Son  of  God 
might  he  glorified  thereby ^ 

Now,  as  Lazarus  actually  died,  these  words  appear  to  need  explana- 
tion. Did  Christ,  in  view  of  the  symptoms  that  were  reported  to  him, 
really  think  that  Lazarus  would  not  die  %  and  was  the  object  of  his 
message  simply  to  console  the  sisters  with  the  assurance  that  the  mercy 

*  This  clause  is  wanting  in  Cod.  Cantab.,  and  other  Latin  authorities  ;  but  nothing  would 
be  lost  to  the  sense  even  if  it  were  left  out ;  for  "  that  good  part  which  cannot  be  lost"  is 
the  "one  thing"  to  which  life  should  be  supremelj'  devoted,  in  contrast  with  the  "many 
things"  which  waste  and  dissipate  a  divided  mind. 

Y 


338  CHRIST  IN  BETHANY. 

and  power  of  God  would  be  glorified  in  themselves  and  their  brother, 
by  saving  the  latter  from  death  ?  Was  the  latter  pait  of  the  message, 
•'  That  the  Son  might  be  glorified,"  added  by  the  Evangelist  himself, 
incorporating  his  own  explanation  with  Christ's  words  1 

Certainly  we  shall  not  assert  that  Christ  could  not  but  foreknow,  in- 
fallibly, in  the  exercise  of  his  superhuman  knowledge,  the  result  of  the 
disease  ;  it  maij  have  been  the  case  that  he  described  it,  in  view  of  the 
symptoms  at  the  time,  as  not  necessarily  fatal,  although  it  afterward 
took  another  turn.  But  if  all  this  were  granted,  there  is  something 
else  to  be  considered.  Christ  could  not,  consistently  with  his  charac- 
ter, have  given  so  positive  a  prediction  on  the  deceptive  evidence  of 
mere  symptoms ;  he  could  not  have  mocked  his  friends  with  baseless 
hopes,  so  soon  to  be  scattered.  V/e  must  take  it  for  granted,  therefore, 
that  his  confidence  was  founded  on  a  far  surer  basis  ;  it  was  the  Divine 
nature,  dwelling  in  him,  that  illuminated  his  human  mind.  To  be 
sure,  it  is  jjossible  that  his  confident  conviction  that  Lazarus  would  be 
saved  may  have  been  coupled  with  uncertainty  as  to  whether  he  should 
be  saved  from  sickness,  or  from  death;  but  the  language  of  his  reply, 
although  it  might  admit  this  construction,  is  not  at  all  inconsistent  witli 
absolute  certainty  on  his  part  that  Lazarus  would  die.  The  reply  was 
intended  to  comfort  the  sisters,  and  to  them  it  could  make  no  difference 
whether  their  brother  was  saved  from  apparent  or  real  death,  in  case 
the  latter  were  of  short  duration  ;  and  Christ  may,  therefore,  have 
wished  to  avoid  presenting  the  naked  idea  of  death  in  his  words.  And 
the  partial  ambiguity  of  his  language  may  also  have  been  designed  to 
test  the  faith  of  the  sisters.  It  is  possible  that  with  this  view  he  ut- 
tered the  words  "  vnep  TTjg  do^rjq  tov  deov,"  and  stopped  there,  the 
rest  being  (possibly)  added  by  the  Evangelist. 

§  231.  The  Death  of  Lazarus ;  Christ's  Conversation  with  the  Disci- 
jjles  in  regard  to  it.     (John,  xi.,  11,  seq.) 

The  affliction  of  Lazarus  determined  Jesus  to  leave  Pereea,  where 
his  labours  had  been  so  fruitful.  Still,  he  remained  there  two  days  (v. 
6),  continuing  his  ministry.  But  although  his  course  was  thiis  decided 
by  circumstances,  he  very  well  knew  that  the  result  would  produce  the 
happiest  religious  effects  upon  the  sisters. 

It  was  probably  on  the  very  evening  of  the  return  of  the  messengers 
that  Lazarus  died.  What  comfort  could  Christ's  encouraging  language 
now  afford  them!  The  word  of  promise  seemed  to  be  broken;  ?iis 
word,  whom  they  had  always  known  as  the  Faithful  and  True ;  his 
word,  which  they  had  never  seen  come  to  naught.  What  conflicting 
feelino-s  must  have  struggled  for  the  mastery  in  their  hearts !  Either 
they  sent  a  second  messenger  to  the  Saviour,*  or  the  latter  became 

•  John's.AOt  mentioning  a  second  messenger  (v.  11)  does  not  prove  that  none  was  eent. 


THE  DEATH  OF  LAZARUS.  ^39 

aware  of  the  event  by  his  own  supernatural  knowledge.  When  he  an- 
nounced to  his  disciples  that  Lazarus  "  slept,"  they  thought  at  first 
that  he  had  heard  it  in  some  way,  and  took  it  as  a  sign  of  recovery.* 
Thereupon  he  said  to  them  in  express  terms,  "Lazarus  is  dead  ;  and 
I  am  glad  for  your  sakes  that  I  was  not  there,  to  the  intent  ye  may 
believe''  (still  further).  Not,  however,  by  any  means  asserting  that  he 
had  purposely  stayed  away,  that  Lazarus  migbt  die  and  their  faith  be 
confirmed  by  his  resurrection ;  but,  in  fact,  implying  that  although  his 
delay  had  been  caused  by  other  reasons,  he  rejoiced  at  the  means  it 
would  afford  of  strengthening  their  faith  at  a  time  when  such  rude 
shocks  were  at  hand.  His  words  imply,  also,  that  if  he  had  been  in 
Bethany,  he  would  not  have  suffered  the  family  to  reach  such  a  pitch 
of  anguish  merely  for  the  sake  of  relieving  them,  and  displaying  the 
highest  degree  of  miraculous  power  afterward  ;  in  compassion  to  their 
grief  he  would  not  have  suffered  the  sick  man  to  die.  Just  as  a  mer- 
ciful man  employs  natural  means  to  relieve  suffering  according  to  the 
circumstances,  so  Christ  made  use  of  his  .?z^/;c/--natural  power ;  with 
this  difference,  however,  that  the  aims  of  his  Divine  calling  were  al- 
ways kept  in  view  in  the  exercise  of  those  powers.  For  this  leason, 
too,  he  did  not  cure  all  the  sick  around  him. 

His  decision  to  go  to  Bethany  astonished  and  alarmed  the  disciples 
to  such  an  extent  that  they  lost  sight  of  tbeir  higher  expectations  from 
hinr  as  Messiah,  and  of  their  higher  view  of  his  person.  It  was  char- 
acteristic of  Thomas,  who  was  more  in  bondage  to  sense  than  tlie 
others,  to  give  utterance  to  his  anxiety  more  prominently  (v.  IG) ;  and, 
in  fact,  this  anxiety  must  have  appeared  out  of  place  to  the  disciples 
had  they  kept  in  view  their  ordinary  conceptions  of  Messiah. 

The  Saviour  now  set  himself  to  dispel  the  clouds  which  their  fears 
had  created  ;  to  revive  their  higher  intuition  of  his  person  and  their 
just  sense  of  communion  with  him;  and  to  remind  them  that,  in  the 
few  remaining  days  in  which  they  were  to  enjoy  his  personal  guidance, 
they  should  submit  to  it  implicitly  and  trustfully.  They  were  accus- 
tomed to  hear  him  compare  himself  with  the  natural  sun,  shedding-  its 
beams  upon  the  earth  during  certain  fixed  hours  ;t  and  it  was,  perhaps, 
Moreover,  when  .John  is  giving  any  instance  of  the  exercise  of  Christ's  supernatural  knowl- 
edge, he  generally  intimates  it  in  some  way ;  here  he  gives  no  such  intimation.  When 
Christ  told  the  dLsciples  that  Lazanis  ■'  slept,"  they  understood  his  words  in  a  natural 
sense  ;  and  it  appears  most  probable  that  they  thought  he  had  received  a  message  from  the 
sisters.  Be  the  case  decided  as  it  may,  Jolm's  language  is  not  such  as  would  be  used  by 
a  man  who  wished  to  give  special  prominence,  to  the  supernatural. 

*  The  disciples  knew,  at  least,  that  persons  believed  to  be  dead  had  been  restored  by 
Christ ;  they  knew,  also,  that  "  sleep"  was  a  common  image  of  death  ;  yet  their  misunder- 
standing is  by  no  means  inexplicable,  as  some  suppose ;  nor  does  it  throw  the  least  shade 
upon  the  credibility  of  the  Evangelist. 

t  John,  ix.,  5  ;  cf  p.  294,  299.  A  similar  figure,  Luke,  xi.,  33 :  The  light  that  cannot  but 
chine.     Cf.  p.  228,  240. 


340  CHRIST  IN  BETHANi'. 

in  allusion  to  this  symbol  that  he  now  said,*  "  Are  there  not  twelve 
hours  in  the  day?  If  any  man  walk  In  the  day  he  stumhleth  not,  he- 
cause  he  seeth  the  light  of  this  world.'"'  So  the  disciples,  so  long  as  they 
had  the  Sun  of  the  spiritual  world  to  guide  them  with  his  light,  were 
to  follow  him  witliont  fear  or  care.  "  But  fa  man  2calk  in  the  night 
he  stumhleth,  hecause  their  is  no  liglu  in  him."  So,  in  the  time  then 
rapidly  approaching,  when  they  should  lose  this  light,  they  were  to 
choose  their  way  with  caution,  lest  they  should  stumble.  Yet,  in  tlu- 
mean  time,  the  higher  life  was  to  become  independent  within  them,  so 
far  that  they  should  not  need  this  sensihlc  guidance  ;  inward  commun- 
ion with  the  Light  of  the  World  was  to  supply  the  place  of  his  visi- 
ble presence,  as  Christ  afterward  told  them  in  his  last  discourses.  In 
this  spiritual  SQnse,  it  is  always  true  that  Christ  is  the  Light  of  thf; 
World. 

§  232.  The  Death  of  Lazarus. —  Christ's  Conversation  with  Martha 
(John,  xi.,  21-28)  and  icith  Mary  (v.  33,  34). — Jesus  Weeps  (v.  35). 
The  intelligence  of  Christ's  approach  to  Bethany  reached  Martha 
sooner  than  her  less  practical  sister.  Mary,  lost  in  grief,  gave  no  heed 
to  the  busy  world  about  her.  The  former  went  out  to  meet  the  Sav- 
iour; and  when  she  saw  him  who  had  done  so  many  mighty  works, 
and  whom  she  believed  to  be  Messiah,  a  ray  of  hope  beamed  into  her 
soul,  but  she  hardly  dared  to  cherish  it.  "  Lord,  hadst  thou  heen  here, 
my  hrother  had  not  died;  but  I  hnoic  that  even  now,  whatsoever  thou 
wilt  ask  of  God,  God  tvill  give  it  thee."  Jesus  replied,  "  Thy  broth- 
er shall  rise  again  ;"  referring  directly  to  her  own  words,  and  not  to 
the  future  resurrection  ;  for  had  he  wished  to  give  her  tJiat  consolation, 
he  would  not  have  done  it  in  such  bare  and  naked  terms.  He  wished 
to  confirm  her  hope,  but  yet  did  it  in  rather  indefinite  language,  either 
designedly,  or  because  her  impatience  interrupted  him.  His  language 
was  too  general  to  satisfy  her  feelings  ;  she  wished  a  definite  assurance 
that  Lazarus  should  be  raised  ;  and,  therefore,  said,  "  I  know  that  he 
shall  rise  again  in  the  resurrection  of  the  last  day  ;"  intimating  what  she 
did  not  venture  to  express,  viz.,  her  wish  first  mentioned,  Christ  made 
use  of  her  misunderstanding  (as  was  his  wont)  to  lead  her  mind  to  the 
great  central  truth  of  religion — the  ground  of  all  the  believer's  hopes 
— as  the  source  of  a  new  hope  in  her  brother's  case.  He  points  to 
himself  as  the  true  life,  the  source  of  all  life,  the  author  of  all  resurrec- 
tion :  "I  a?n  the  resurrection  and  the  life  ;  he  that  believeth  in  me,  though 
he  were  dead,  yet  shall  he  live  ;  and  whosoever  liveth  and  believeth  in 
me  shall  never  die.'"  He  then  asked  her  the  direct  question,  "  Bcliev- 
est  thou  this?"  He  intended  to  teach  her  that  the  faith  of  Lazarus 
had  been  rewarded  by  a  life  beyond  the  power  of  death ;  and  that  He, 
*  The  words  arc  enigmatical  without  this  allusion ;  with  it,  they  are  plain. 


THE  DEATH  OF  LAZARUS.  341 

the  author  of  the  resurrection  and  of  a  Ufe  which  death  could  not  even 
interrupt,  could  now  also  call  her  dead  brother  back  again  to  life. 

Although  she  did  not  fully  comprehend  his  words,  they  gave  her  new 
hopes  ;  and,  after  expressing  anew  her  faith  in  him  as  the  Messiah — 
which  included  for  her  all  things  else — she  hastened  away  to  call  her 
broken-hearted  sister,  who  had  not  even  yet  heard  of  the  Saviour's  ap- 
proach. Nothing  could  rouse  her  from  her  profound  and  passive  grief 
but  her  love  for  Him  to  whose  words  of  life  she  had  so  often  surren- 
dered herself,  as  passively  and  humbly.  She  hastened  toward  Jesus. 
The  Jews  that  were  condoling  with  her  in  the  house,  fearing  that  she 
was  going  to  her  brother's  grave  to  give  up  to  an  excess  of  sorrow,  fol- 
lowed after.  She  saw  Jesus,  but  offered  no  such  request  as  her  sister 
had  done;  falling  at  his  feet,  she  only  cried,  "  Lord,  if  thou  liadst  heen 
here,  my  hrothcr  had  not  died^  Tears  choked  her  further  utterance ; 
nor,  indeed,  was  it  her  wont  to  anticipate  Him  whom  her  soul  so  re- 
vered and  loved.  The  Jews  around,  sympathizing  in  her  sorrow,  could 
not  refrain  from  tears. 

And  Jesus  wept  in  the  depth  of  his  compassion.  It  has  been  in- 
ferred from  this,  that  although  he  hoped  to  restore  Lazarus,  he  was 
not,  as  yet,  sure  of  it ;  had  he  been  so  (it  is  said),  the  consciousness  that 
he  was  soon  to  turn  the  mourning  into  joy  would  have  banished  all 
grief  from  his  mind.  But  surely  the  expressions  of  bitter  lamenta- 
tion, the  tears  and  agony  of  all  around,  were  enough  to  stir  the  com- 
passionate heart  of  Him  who  sympathized  so  deeply  with  all  human 
feelings,  even  though  he  knew  that  he  should  soon  remove  the  cause  of 
grief  itself.  A  physician  (though  the  analogy  is  utterly  inadequate), 
standing  by  the  bedside  of  a  patient  surrounded  by  weeping  friends, 
may  well  be  affected  by  their  grief,  though  he  may  be  sure,  so  far  as 
human  skill  can  give  surety,  that  he  will  heal  the  disease.  And  we 
must  bear  in  mind,  too,  that  Christ  was  Man  as  well  as  God  ;  and  that 
the  blending  of  the  Godhead  and  the  manhood,  the  Divine  infallibility 
with  the  human  hesitancy,  must,  in  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  offer 
many  enigmas  for  our  contemplation. 

The  Evangelist  gives  a  graphic  description  of  the  effects  produced 
upon  the  Jews  around  by  the  sight  of  the  tears  of  Jesus.  The  better 
disposed  saw  in  them  only  a  manifestation  of  his  love  for  Lazarus. 
Others  affected  to  doubt  the  truth  of  his  miracles;  he  loved  Lazarus 
and  his  family  ;  why  did  he  not  save  him  1  "  Could  not  this  man,  tvhich 
opened  the  cijes  of  the  blind,*  have  caused  that  even  this  man  should  not 
have  died?" 

*  St)-auf!s  finds  a  contradiction  here  between  John  and  the  other  Evangelists :  "  The 
Jews  quote  only  the  curing  of  the  blind;  wliy  did  they  not  quote  the  raising  of  the  dead, 


^4;i  CHRIST  IN  BETHANY. 

§  233.    The  Resurrection  of  Lazarus. —  The  Praijcr  of  Christ.     (John, 

xi.,  38-44.) 

AV  hen  the  stone  was  about  to  be  lifted  from  the  grave,  Martha,* 
whoie  heart  fluctuated  between  hope  and  fear,  gave  new  utterance  to 
her  doubts:  '^  Lord,  hy  this  time  he  stiriketh  ;l  for  he  hath  hcen  dead 
four  days.''  Jesus  said  unto  her,  "  Haid  I  not  unto  thee,  that  if  thou 
wouldst  believe,  thou  shouldst  see  the  glory  of  GodV'\  (see  God  glorify 
liimself  in  the  effects  of  his  Almighty  mercy). 

Then  looking  down  into  the  grave,  and  assui'ed  that  Lazarus  would 
lise,  as  though  the  miracle  were  already  wrought,  he  offers  first 
his  thanksgiving  to  the  Father :  "  Father,  I  thank  thee  that  thou  hast 
heard  me  ;  and  I  knew  that  thou  headrest  me  always  ;  hut  because  of  the 
jtcople  which  stand,  by,  I  said  it,  that  they  may  beliece  that  thou  hast 
sent  ■me.''''  Meaning  that  his  utterance  of  thanks  did  not  imply  that  he 
only  then  became  conscious  of  power  to  raise  up  Lazarus.  Prayer  and 
thanksgiving  were  not  isolated  fragments  of  Christ's  life ;  his  whole 
life  was  one  prayer  and  one  thanksgiving ;  for  he  knew  that  the  heav- 
enly Father  heard  him  in  all  things,  and  always  granted  the  powers 
needful  to  his  calling.  He  made  this  public,  individual  thanksgiving, 
to  testify  to  those  around  that  he  did  this,  like  all  his  other  acts,  as  the 
messenger  of  the  Father,  and  considered  it,  as  all  things  else,  his  Fa- 
ther's gilt. 

This  prayer  has  led  some  to  distinguish  this  miracle  from  others  as 
(me  not  accomplished  by  Christ's  indwelling  Divine  power,  but  by  God 
for  him  ;  to  class  it,  in  fact,  among  answers  to  prayer.  But  as  Christ's 
whole  life  was  one  prayer,  in  the  sense  just  mentioned,  as  he  always 
acted  in  unity  with  God,  in  the  form  of  dependence,  he  could  have  ex- 
pressed himself  in  the  same  terms  in  regard  to  any  of  his  miracles. 
And  although  Lazarus  did  not  rise  until  the  voice  of  Jesus  called  him 

of  which  the  other  Evaugelists  give  several  instances  V  But  how  do  we  know  that  these 
Jews  at  the  city  were  acquainted  with  what  had  occurred  in  Galilee  ?  Was  it  not  natu- 
ral for  them  to  recur  to  the  miraculous  act  perfoniied  by  Christ  in  the  city  itself  so  short  a 
time  before,  and  which  had  excited  such  virulent  opposition  against  him  ?  If  Jolui's  Gos- 
pel were  an  invenlion,  the  inventor  must  have  heard  other  narratives  of  Christ's  raising 
the  dead  ;  and  had  he  wished,  as  must  have  been  the  case,  to  invent  a  stronger  example 
than  any  of  those  recorded,  he  would  surely  have  alluded  to  them.  The  question,  then,  is 
just  as  applicable  if  the  narrative  be  fictitious  as  if  it  be  true. 

*  The  conduct  of  Martha  and  Mary  is  in  entire  harmony  with  their  characters ;  the  for- 
mer doubts,  and  expresses  her  doubt ;  the  latter  looks  on  in  silence. 

t  We  must  grant  that  those  are  right  who  say  that  this  expression  of  Martha's  is  no 
jrroof  that  corruption  had  commenced  in  the  corpse. 

+  The  reference  of  the  words  oxpn  rni'  Solav  ruii  Seov  is  doubtful.  Some  refer  them  to  the 
replj'  to  the  messengers,  John,  xi.,  4.  In  that  reply  nothing  is  said  of  "  beheving,"  but 
faith  is  silently  presupposed.  Others  refer  them  to  Clirist's  words  addressed  direclly  to 
Martha  (v.  ao),  in  which  faith  is  expressly  required.  It  is  true,  the  words  '■  oxf/u,"  Ac.,  are 
not  given  in  that  verse  exi)ressly,  but  it  contains,  as  we  have  already  remarked,  the  basis 
of  a  promise  of  the  kind,  only  not  aimounced. 


THE  RAISING  OF  LAZARUS.  34:5 

foi-lL,  be  could  thank  God  for  it  as  an  act  achieved,  in  his  certainly  of 
at  once  accomplishing  it ;  and,  in  so  doing,  testify  that  the  power  to  do 
it  was  from  God.* 

§  234.   Mcasicrcs  taken  against  Christ  h])  the  Sanhedrim.     (John,  xi., 

47,  seq.) 
The  raising  of  Lazarus  exerted  an  important  influence  in  bringing 
about  the  final  catastrophe  of  Christ's  life.  On  the  one  hand,  it  led 
many  to  believe  in  his  Divine  calling,  and,  on  the  other,  it  decided  the 
ruling  Pharisaic  party  to  adopt  more  violent  measures  against  him. 
They  were  now  satisfied  that  their  sentence  of  excommunicationt  had 
not  counteracted  the  impressions  which  his  ministry  had  made  upon 
the  minds  of  the  people ;  and  feai'ed  that,  if  they  let  him  alone,  all  men 
would  believe  on  him  as  Messiah.  In  view  of  the  threatened  danger, 
a  council  of  the  Sanhedrim  was  summoned.  Men  who  were  in  the 
habit  of  sacrificing  the  peace  of  the  state  to  their  own  passions  now 
made  it  a  plea  for  vigorous  steps  against  Christ.  "  If  the  thing  is 
allowed  to  go  on,  all  will  believe  on  him.  The  people  will  pi-oclaim 
him  king  ;  and  the  Romans  will  come  and  take  away  what  power  and 
nationality  they  have  left  us."  Caiaphas,  the  high-priest,  adopting  the 
view  thus  presented,  said,  "  It  is,  at  any  rate,  better  that  one  should  die 
for  all,  than  that  the  whole  nation  should  perish."  And  without  any 
legal  investigation  of  the  criminality  of  Jesus,  it  was  resolved,  on  pre- 
text of  the  safety  of  the  state,  by  the  majority  (against  whose  vehe- 
mence a  few  more  moderate  members  could  do  nothing),  that  he  must 

*  The  omission  of  the  raising:  of  Lazarus  in  the  first  three  Gospels  has  been  adduced  as 
an  arsjument  against  its  credibility.  Were  it  not  tliat  other  events  are  omitted  in  the  same 
way,  and  were  we  not  able  to  acfouut  for  it  by  the  peculiar  character,  origin,  and  aims  of 
.John's  Gospel,  the  argument  might  have  more  weight.  To  seek  a  special  reason  for  the 
omission  in  this  case  could  lead  to  nothing  but  arbitrary  hypotheses.  But  it  is  sufBciently 
explained  by  the  general  reason,  viz.,  that  the  former  Gospels  contain  only  traditions  of  the 
ministry  of  Christ  at  Jerusalem,  followed  by  an  account  of  his  last  stay  in  that  city.  In 
this  outline  there  is  no  point  at  which  the  raising  of  Lazarus  would  naturally  and  neces- 
sarily be  joined.  It  has  been  said  that  the  intention,  to  exaggerate  is  obvious  in  John's 
Gosjiel,  which  always  sets  forth  the  miracles  which  it  records  as  the  highest  possible,  e.g., 
the  cure  of  the  palsy  of  38  years'  standing ;  of  the  man  that  was  Lorn  blind  ;  the  raising 
(if  Lazarus,  &c.  In  reply  to  this,  we  might  admit  that  John,  having  an  apologetic  object, 
only  selected,  from  the  abundant  materials  furnished  by  the  Evangelical  history,  a  few 
events  illustrating  in  the  liighest  degree  the  io'^a  of  Christ ;  but  this  admission  would  not 
affect  the  veracity  of  his  narratives  in  the  slightest  degree.  But  the  heating  of  the  lepers, 
one  of  the  most  marked  displays  of  miraculous  power,  is  omitted  by  John ;  while  the  feed- 
ing of  the  Jive  thousand,  the  very  highest  of  them  all,  is  given  by  the  other  Evangelists  as 
well  as  by  him.  A  high  degree  of  miraculous  power,  therefore,  was  not  the  sole  gi'ound 
on  which  John  selected  the  miracles  that  he  recorded  ;  he  had  regard,  also,  partly  to  their 
conuexitm  with  Christ's  discourses,  and  partly  to  their  connexion  with  the  course  of  the 
facts  in  his  history.  This  last  holds  good  especially  of  the  narrative  in  question — that  of 
the  raising  of  Lazarus.  It  connects  with  the  course  of  his  life  the  triumphal  entry  into 
Jerusalem,  and  the  enthusiasm  of  the  people  in  his  favour;  and  it  also  explains  the  resolu- 
tion soon  taken  by  the  Sanhedi-im  to  put  him  out  of  the  way.  And  this,  in  tuni,  confirms 
the  veracity'  of  tli-e  naiTative  itself  t  Of.  p.  29S. 


J44  CHRIST  IN  EPHRAI3I. 


die.  The  mode  of  his  death  was  to  be  subsequently  decided  on,  ac- 
cording to  circumstances.  An  order  was  issued  for  the  seizure  of  his 
person,  in  case  he  should  attend  the  Feast  of  the  Passover  at  Jerusalem. 


CHAPTER  XVI. 

JESUSINEPHRAIM. 
§  235.    T?ie  Necessity  for  Christ'' s  Death. 

TO  avoid  the  snares  of  his  enemies,  and  secure  a  short  season  of  un- 
disturbed intercourse  with  the  disciples  before  the  close  of  his 
career  on  earth,  Jesus  retired  into  the  obscure  village  of  Ephraim,*  in 
the  desert  of  Judea,  several  milest  north  of  Jerusalem.  He  knew 
that  in  travelling  to  the  Passover  at  the  city  he  should  be  overcome 
by  the  machinations  of  the  Pharisees,  and  bo  put  to  death.  The  ques- 
tion may  be  asked,  Why,  then,  did  he  not  keep  himself  concealed  still 
longer?  He  might  then  have  carried  on  the  still  defective  religious 
training  of  his  disciples,  and  might,  also,  have  prepared  a  greater  num- 
ber of  agents  to  disseminate  his  ti'uth. 

So,  indeed,  it  might  be  said  if  he  had  been  a  mere  teacher  of  truth, 
like  other  men.  Even  though  at  last  he  had  to  fall  a  victim  to  the 
hierarchical  party,  he  might  thus  have  gained  so7ne  time,  at  least,  for 
the  training  of  his  followers  ;  a  work  of  the  highest  possible  importance, 
as  every  thing,  in  the  developement  of  his  work,  depended  upon  the 
way  in  which  they  apprehended  his  doctrine.  But  the  doctrine  of 
.]  esus  was  not  a  system  of  general  conceptions ;  it  was  founded  upon  a 
fact,  viz.,  that  in  Him  had  been  manifested  the  end  to  which  all  previ- 
ous revelations  to  the  Jewish  people  had  been  but  preparatory ;  that 
He  was  the  aim  of  the  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament ;  that  in  Hivi 
the  kingdom  of  God  was  realized.  Of  this  fact,  to  which  his  whole 
previous  ministry  had  borne  witness,  he  had  now  to  testify  openly  be- 
fin-e  the  face  of  his  enemies.  Moreover,  his  labours  in  Galilee,  and  the 
raising  of  Lazarus  at  Bethany,  had  raised  the  expectations  of  the  peo- 
ple to  the  highest  pitch  (John,  xi.,  50)) ;  and  many  who  had  gone  up  to 
the  city  before  the  Passover  to  purify  themselves  were  anxious  to  know 
whether  he  would  venture  to  come  in  spite  of  the  hostile  intentions  of 
the  Sanhedrim.  To  stay  away  then,  would  have  been  to  lose  the  most 
favourable  juncture  ;  and  to  manifest  both  fear  of  his  enemies  and  dis- 
trust of  his  own  Divine  calling  to  the  Messiahship.  Now  was  the 
time,  when  the  rage  of  the  Pharisees  was  at  its  highest,  in  the  face  of 
their  sentence  and  their  threats,  to  bear  witness  to  himself  openly  as 
Messiah.  He  did  not  sceic  death,  but  went  to  meet  it  in  the  excclition 
•  John,  xi.,  51.  t  According  to  Jerome,  20  llomau  miles. 


BLIND  BARTIMEUS.  345 

of  his  calling,  in  obedience  to  the  Divine  will,  and  with  a  love  to  God 
and  man  that  was  ready  for  any  sacrifice.*  And  he  was  assured  that 
precisely  by  his  death  was  the  great  object,  to  which  in  holy  love  he 
had  devoted  his  whole  life,  to  be  fully  realized. 

As  for  the  imperfect  training  of  his  disciples,  it  must  have  caused 
him  uneasiness  had  he  not  been  able  to  rely  (as  no  human  teacher 
could  do)  upon  his  own  continued  operation,  and  that  of  the  Divine 
iSpirit,  in  their  hearts  and  minds,  to  complete  their  culture.  With  this 
presupposition  he  could  not  but  be  confident  that  his  separation  from 
them  would  further  their  independent  developement,  as  he  himself  told 
them  afterward  in  his  closinsf  conversations  with  them. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 

CHRIST'S  LAST  PASSOVER  JOURNEY  TO  JERUSALEM. 

§  236.  Journey  to  Jericho. —  The  Healing  of  Blind  Bartimeus.     (Matt., 
XX.,  30,  seq. ;   Luke,  xviii.,  35,  seq. ;  Mark,  x.,  46,  seq.) 

CHRLST  did  not  go  directly  from  Ephraim  to  Jerusalem,  but  passed 
first  eastwardly  towards  the  Jordan,  to  the  vicinity  of  Jericho,  a 
small  town  about  six  hoursf  distant  from  the  metropolis.  Here  he 
could  meet  the  caravan  coming  from  Galilee  to  the  feast.|  Various 
reasons  may  be  assigned  for  this  course  on  the  part  of  Christ :  a  wish 
not  to  fall  at  once  into  the  hands  of  the  Sanhedrim ;  or  to  meet  the 
Galilean  multitudes  on  whom  his  ministry  had  produced  such  powerful 
effects ;  or,  by  means  of  the  festal  caravans,  to  carry  out  his  plan  of  a 
solemn  Messianic  entry  into  Jerusalem.  And  as  this  last  might  excite 
false  hopes  in  the  disciples,  it  was  the  more  necessary  to  impress  upon 
them  anew  the  fact  that  his  kingdom  was  to  be  glorified  by  his  suffer- 
ings, and  not  to  be  established  in  earthly  and  visible  splendour.§ 

As  the  Saviour  entered  Jericho  attended  by  the  festal  caravans, 
honouring  him  as  Theocratic  king,  there  sat,  not  far  from  the  gate  of 

*  There  must  be  a  right  conception  of  Christ's  self-sacrifice  as  a  moral  act,  in  connexion 
with  his  whole  calling,  in  order  to  any  just  doctritud  view  of  his  sufferings. 

t  According  to  Josephus,  150  stadia. 

%  Perhaps,  also,  he  took  his  way  through  Jericho  in  order  to  extend  his  ministry  in  Judea. 
As  the  raising  of  Lazarus  is  not  mentioned  by  the  three  first  Evangehsts,  so  the  retirement 
into  Ephraim,  nearly  connected  with  the  fonner  event,  is  only  to  be  found  in  Jolm.  Apart 
from  the  latter,  we  should  be  led  to  suppose  that  he  passed  through  Jericho  on  his  direct 
way  from  Galilee  to  Jerusalem. 

9  The  departure  from  Ephraim  connects  itself  naturally  with  Luke,  xviii.,  31;  why, 
otherwise,  should  it  be  said  there  that  hrfore  they  came  to  Jericho  he  "took  his  disciples 
apait,  and  said  unto  them  ?"  &c. 


346  LAST  TASSOVER  JOURNEY  TO  JERUSALEM. 

tlie  town,  a  blind  bet^gar  named  Bartivicus*  who  heard  the  noise  of 
the  procession,  and  inquiring  its  cause,  was  told  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth 
was  passing  by.  He  then  cried  to  the  Messiah  for  mercy.  The  re- 
bukes of  many,  who  did  not  wish  him  to  disturb  the  Theocratic  king 
with  his  clamour,  had  no  effect  upon  him.  Jesus  stood,  and  told  him 
to  come  near.  Then  the  people,  knowing  that  the  Saviour  called 
none  whom  he  did  not  mean  to  help,  said  to  the  blind  man,  "Ijc  of 
good  comfort ;  he  calleth  tlieey  He  cast  off  his  garment  to  run  the 
faster,  and  hastened  towards  Jesus.  He  v/as  healed,  and  followed  the 
])rocession,  joining  in  the  general  Hosannah  ! 

§  237.  Christ  Lodges  with  Zacchcus.  (Luke,  xix.,  2,  seq.) 
The  healing  of  the  blind  man  heightened  the  rejoicing  of  the  multi- 
tude. But  Jesus  went  with  them  no  further;  perhaps  the  caravan 
wished  to  reach  Jerusalem  on  the  same  day.t  In  the  suburbs  of  Jeri- 
cho lived  a  rich  publican,  named  Zaccheus,  who  probably  knew  Chrit;t 
by  the  reports  of  other  publicans.  Being  of  short  stature,  he  climbed 
a  tree,  in  order  to  see  Christ  when  the  procession  passed  by.  Evev 
ready  to  welcome  the  dawning  of  better  feelings  in  the  hearts  of  sin- 
ners, the  Saviour  looked  up,  and  said,  "  Zaccheu.s,X  make  haste  and 
come  down,  for  to-day  Imust  abide  at  thy  house.''  The  love  with  which 
Christ  met  his  desire  affected  him  more  deeply  than  any  thin"-  else 
could  have  done ;  his  heart  w^as  won  ;  and  in  the  fulness  of  his  joy  he 
vowed  to  prove  his  repentance  by  dividing  half  of  his  property  among 
the  poor,  and  remunerating  four-fold  all  whom  he  had  overreached. 
It  surprised  many  that  He,  who  was  recognized  as  Theocratic  king, 

*  According  to  Luke,  C'ljrist  met  tlie  blind  man  on  eidcrlng  the  town  ;  according  tc 
Matthew  and  Mark,  on  leaving  it;  and  Matthew,  besides,  sjjeaks  of  tu-o  blind  men.  It  is 
easy  to  conceive  how  these  different  representations  of  the  same  event  could  arise;  tlie 
only  question  is,  which  has  the  more  internal  probability '/  Mark  not  only  gives  the  name 
of  the  blind  man,  but  his  whole  account  is  so  gra])hic  and  circumstantial,  that  it  must  have 
been  derived  from  the  report  of  an  eye-witness.  But  in  Luke  the  counexion  of  events  is 
60  close  that  we  cannot  drop  a  single  link:  the  entry,  the  blind  man's  joining  the  proces- 
sion, its  passage  through  the  town,  its  halt  at  the  house  of  Zaccheus  ;  all  hang  together  and 
bear  the  evident  stamp  of  tnitli.  In  this  particular,  then,  we  follow  Luke.  The  account 
used  by  Mark,  perhaps,  stated  that  the  blind  man  joined,  the  procession  at  the  gate  and 
went  forth  with  it ;  and  this  might  naturally  lead  to  the  supposition  that  the  event  occuired 
on  the  jiassage  out.  The  statement  of  Matthew,  that  two  were  cured,  is  more  difficult.  It 
may  be  explained  either  on  the  ground  that  two  accounts  were  blended  together,  or  that 
two  blind  njen  were  cured,  one  at  the  entrance,  the  other  at  the  outlet,  of  the  town.  (It 
wa.^  a  common  thing  for  blind  beggars  to  sit  at  the  gates.)  This  supposition,  and  a  subse- 
quent blending  of  the  two  narratives,  would  account  not  only  for  Matthew's  mentioning 
twQ  blind  men,  but  also  for  the  discrepancy  in  Mark  and  Luke  as  to  the  spot  of  the  cure, 

t  It  was  hut  a  short  distance  from  Jericho  to  .Jerusalem;  and  we  know  neither  at  what 
point  Christ  joined  tlio  caravan,  nor  how  far  it  had  journeyed  that  day,  nor  what  time  of 
the  day  it  was. 

\  Whether  ho  had  known  Zaccheus  before,  or  was  infonned  of  his  name  by  the  by 
stand(!rs,  is  of  no  moment.  The  Evangelist  does  not  intimate  that  he  made  use  of  bis 
supernatural  knowledge  in  calling  the  man  by  name. 


THE  REQUEST  OF  SALOIME.  347 

■should  go  to  "be  guest  with  a  man  that  was  a  sinner."  With  reference 
to  this  feeling  Christ  said,  "  This  day  is  salration*  come  to  tJiis  house, 
forasvmch  as  he  also  is  a  son  of  Abraham  ;  for  the  Son  of  Man  is  come 
to  seek  and  to  save  that  which  teas  lost.'"]  And  this  was  only  an  appli- 
cation to  a  particular  case  of  the  general  truth,  that  it  was  his  mission 
to  I'estore  again  the  image  of  God  that  had  been  defaced  in  humanity. 

§  :2;J8.  The  Request  of  Salome.  —  Thc^  Ambition  of  the  Discijjles  re- 
buked.    (Matt.,  XX.,  20-28  ;  Mark,  x.,  35-45.) 

The  worldly  views  of  Christ's  Messiahship  which  had  been  revived 
in  the  minds  of  the  disciples  by  the  reception  he  had  met  with  from  the 
festal  caravan,  could  hardly  fail  to  be  strengthened  by  what  occurred 
ill  Jericho.  His  own  teachings  had  not  yet  fully  convinced  them  ;  and 
these  impressions  upon  their  senses  wei'e  stronger,  for  the  moment, 
than  those  which  he  had  made  upon  their  souls. 

The  sons  of  Salome,  James  and  John,  enjoyed  Christ's  closest  in- 
timacy; the  latter,  indeed,  always  sat  at  his  right  hand.  In  view  of 
this  intimate  relation,  and  not  without  the  knowledge  of  her  sons,|:  she 
came  to  Christ  and  prayed  him,  that  when  Messiah's  kingdom  should 
])e  outwardly  realized,  her  two  sons  might  sit,  the  one  on  his  right 
hand,  the  other  on  his  left. 

As  usual,  Christ  did  not  combat  these  ideas  of  his  kingdom  directly 
and  at  length ;  he  wished  to  destroy  the  root  in  the  hearts  of  his  fol- 
lowers. He  taught  them  anew  that  they  were  to  share  with  him,  not 
places  of  honour,  but  pains  and  sufferings.  "  Ye  know  not  what  ye  ask. 
Can  ye  drink  of  the  cup  (of  suffering)  that  I  shall  drink  ofP'  To  this 
they  replied,  probably  without  duly  weighing  the  import  of  his  words, 
"  TFe  ai-e  able.'"  And  he  answered  :  "I  can,  indeed,  impart  to  you 
the  fellowship  of  my  sufi'erings ;  but  rajik  in  the  kingdom  of  God  de- 
pends not  upon  my  will,  but  upon  the  allotment  of  the  Father"  (it  was 
not  to  be  an  arbitrary  allotment,  but  the  highest  necessity  of  Divine 
wisdom  and  justice). 

The  disciples  were  indignant  at  the  ambition  of  James  and  John  ; 
but  Christ  called  them  all  about  him,  and  showed  them  how  inconsist- 
ent such  strifes  were  with  their  relations  to  each  other  and  the  spirit 

*  He  had  become  convinced  of  sin,  and  received  the  bringer  of  salvation  with  repentance 
and  love. 

t  Schleiermacher  thinks  (ii.,  174)  that  this  occun-ed  on  the  second  day,  after  the  affair 
had  become  generally  known.  We  see  no  sufficient  ground  for  this  supposition.  It  ap- 
pears from  the  whole  narrative  that  the  murmurs  of  the  people,  and  the  words  of  Zaccheus. 
arose  from  an  immediate  impression.  The  word  aniiipov  (Luke,  xix.,  9),  and  its  relation  to 
ariitpov  (v.  5),  speaks  in  favour  of  our  view.  Schlciet-Jnacher  seems  to  lay  too  much  stress 
on  aKovovTMv  (v.  11). 

X  According  to  Mark,  the  brothers  presented  the  request  directly  to  Christ ;  according  to 
Matthew  (which  seems  the  more  hkely),  they  did  it  through  their  mother.  Christ's  address 
to  them  (Matt.,  xx.,  22)  presupposes  that  really  they  made  the  request. 


348  LAST  PASSOVER  JOURNEY  TO  JERUSALEM. 

that  ought  to  animate  them.  There  could  not  be  (he  told  them)  among 
them  such  relations  of  superiority  and  subordination  as  existed  in  civil 
communities ;  the  communion  of  the  Divine  kingdom  could  know  of 
none  such.  They  were  to  emulate  each  other  only  in  serving  each 
other  with  self-sacrificing  love ;  like  their  Lord  and  Master,  who  had 
come,  not  to  be  ministered  unto,  but  to  minister,  and  to  sacrifice  his 
life  for  the  ransom  of  many.  Whosoever  was  greatest  in  this  was  the 
greatest  among  them.* 

§  239.  Parable  of  the  Pounds.  (Luke,  xix.,  11,  seq.) 
Christ  made  use  of  several  parables  during  this  last  period  of  his 
life,  while  his  disciples  were  still  expecting  that  he  would  establish  a 
visible  kingdom,  to  give  them  purer  ideas  of  the  process  by  which  it 
was  to  be  founded  and  developed.  Among  these  is  the  parable  of  the 
Pounds,  which  was  given,  according  to  Luke,  just  as  they  left  Jericho, 
expressly  because  "  he  was  nigh  to  Jerusalem,  and  they  thought  that 
the  kingdom  of  God  should  immediately  appear," 

There  were  three  points  on  which  he  specially  sought  to  fix  their 
attention,  viz.,  the  opposition  he  was  to  encounter  at  Jerusalem  j  his 
departure  from  them,  and  return  at  a  later  period  to  subdue  his  foes 
and  establish  his  kingdom  in  triumph  ;  and,  finally,  their  duty  to  labour 
actively  in  the  interval,  and  not  to  await  in  indolence  the  achievement 
of  victory  by  other  means,  without  their  co-operation.  He  particularly 
aimed  to  show  them  that  the  position  they  should  occupy  in  the  devel- 
jpement  of  the  kingdom  of  God  would  depend  upon  their  zeal  and 
activity  in  the  use  of  the  means  intrusted  to  them.  This  he  illustrated 
under  the  figure  of  a  capital,  loaned  on  interest;  the  same  amount,  viz., 
one  mma,  is  committed  to  each  of  ten  servants,  and  in  proportion  to 
the  gain  of  this,  whether  more  or  less,  is  the  station  assigned  to  them 
by  their  master.  One  only  is  wholly  rejected — he  that  guards  care- 
fully the  sum  committed  to  him  and  loses  nothing,  but  gains  nothing. 
The  apology  which  he  makes  assists  us  to  determine  the  particular 
character  which  Christ  has  in  view.  He  excuses  himself  on  the  ground 
of  fear;  the  lord  is  a  hard  master.  He  represents  those,  therefore, 
whose  mistaken  apprehensions  of  the  account  they  will  have  to  render 
keep  them  in  inactivity,  and  who  retire  from  the  active  labours  of  the 
world  in  order  to  avoid  contamination  from  its  luiholy  atmosphere.  In 
many  of  the  disciples,  indeed,  the  prospect  of  the  approaching  struggle 
with  the  world  may  have  suggested  the  thought  of  such  a  retirement. 

*  Luke  does  not  give  this  iian-ative,  but  mentions  (xxii.,  24)  a  similar  dispute  for  rank 
among  the  disciples,  and  recites  these  similar  expressions  of  our  Lord.  It  is  probably  out 
of  place,  as  such  a  contention  coidd  hardly  have  arisen  at  the  last  meal,  after  the  institu- 
tion of  the  Sacrament.  The  collocation  may  have  arisen  from  the  fact  that  the  symbolical 
washing  of  feet,  so  strikinij  a  rebuke  of  this  ambitious  spirit,  was  connected  with  the  last 
meal. 


THE  LABOURERS  IN  THE  VINEYARD.  349 

And  not  without  reason  is  the  capital  which  the  unfaithful  serva-it 
failed  to  employ  appropriated  to  him  who  made  the  most  of  his.  In- 
deed, the  key  to  the  whole  parable  is  given  by  Christ  himself  in  that 
memorable  saying,  repeated  so  often  and  ir^  such  various  connexions  :* 
"Unto  every  one  that  hath  (i.  c,  hath  as  real  and  productive  capital) 
shall  (more,  and  ever  more)  he  given  (and  most  to  him  that  gaineth 
most) ;  and  from  han  that  hath  not  {i.  c,  does  not  tmly  j>ossess  what  he 
has,  but  buries  it)  shall  he  taken  away  even  that  which  he  hathT 

In  this  parable,  in  view  of  the  circumstances  under  which  it  was 
uttered,  and  of  the  approaching  catastrophe,  special  intimations  are 
given  of  Christ's  departure  from  the  earth,  of  his  ascension,  and  re- 
turn to  judge  the  rebellious  Theocratic  nation  and  consummate  his  do- 
minion. It  describes  a  great  man,  who  travels  to  the  distant  court  of 
the  mighty  emperor,  to  receive  from  him  authority  over  his  countrymen, 
and  to  return  with  royal  power.  So  Christ  was  not  immediately  rec- 
ognized in  his  kingly  office,  but  first  had  to  depart  from  the  earth  and 
leave  his  "agents  to  advance  his  kingdom,  to  ascend  into  heaven  and  be 
appointed  Theocratic  King,  and  return  again  to  exercise  his  contested 
power. 

§  240.  Parable  of  the  Labourers  in  the  Vineyard.  (Matt.,  xx.,  1-lG.j 
Here,  also,  belongs  the  parable  of  the  lahourers  in.  the  vineyard,  which 
opposes  all  assertion  of  one's  own  merits,  and  all  anxiety  for  rank  and 
rewards  among  the  servants  of  thp  kingdom  of  God.  This  parable  ad- 
mits of  many  and  various  applications ;  but,  in  order  to  understand  it 
correctly,  we  must  consider  it  b}^  itself,  apart  from  the  introductory  and 
concluding  passages.! 

*  Cf.  p.  105,  190. 

t  The  words  "The  last  shall  be  first,  and  the  first  last"  (v.  16),  cannot  possibly  denote  tlie 
punctum  saliens  of  the  parable  ;  in  it  the  last  are  not  preferred  to  the  first ;  the  latter 
simply  fail  to  receive  n:oi-e  than  the  former,  as  they  had  expected.  Nor  do  they  complain  of 
receiving  their  wages  last,  but  only  that  they  do  not  get  more  than  the  others.  It  is  some- 
thing merely  accidental,  necessary  only  for  the  consistency  of  the  representation,  and  aris- 
ing merely  from  its  form,  that  the  turn  of  the  first  comes  last ;  they  had  to  see  the  last  re- 
ceive equally  as  much  as  themselves  before  they  could  complain  of  it,  and  thus  give  occa- 
sion for  the  utterance  of  the  truth  which  it  is  the  main  object  of  the  parable  to  set  fortli. 
In  Luke,  xiii.,  30,  the  same  words  occur  ("there  are  last,"  &c.),  but  in  a  totally  different 
sense.  Here  the  "  last"  are  those  who  are  wholly  shut  out  from  the  kingdom  of  God  ;  and 
the  passage  teaches  that  many  from  among  the  nations,  estranged  from  God,  should  be 
called  to  share  in  his  kingdom ;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  many  should  be  excluded  from 
it  who  had  held  high  places  among  the  ancient  people.  Taken  in  this  sense,  these  words 
would  be  foreign  to  the  scope  of  the  parable.  The  latter  clause  of  the  verse,  "many  are 
called,  but  few  chosen,"  mean  (according  to  Matt.,  xxii.,  14)  that  many  are  outwardly  called, 
and  belong  by  profession  to  the  kingdom  of  God.  Nor  is  this  relevant  to  the  parable  ; 
which  draws  no  contrast  between  the  few  and  the  many,  the  called  and  the  chosen  ;  and, 
in  fact,  makes  no  mention  at  all  of  such  as  are  entirely  excluded  from  the  kingdom.  We, 
therefore,  cannot  but  suppose  that  tliis  parable,  so  faithfully  preserved,  and  bearing  so  in- 
dubitably the  stamp  of  Christ,  is  joined  to  the  words  that  precede  and  follow  by  a  merely 
accidental  link  of  coruiexion.     (In  this  supposition,  which,  indeed,  has  long  been  a  certainty 


350  LAST  PASSOVER  JOURNEY  TO  JERUSALEM. 

The  prominent  idea  of  the  parable  is,  that  all  who  faithfully  obey 
their  call,  who  are  truly  converted,  and  labour  diligently  after  their 
conversion,  whether  it  occur  at  an  earlier  or  later  period,  whether  tlie 
term  of  their  new  life  is  long  or  short,  are  made  partakers  of  the  same 
blessedness  in  the  kingdom  of  God.  The  question  is  not  what  they 
were  before  their  conversion,  but  what  they  become  after  it.  All  who 
have  reached  this  point  have  the  same  thing  in  common  ;  for  all  re- 
ceive the  principle  of  the  higher  life,  with  which,  where  it  really  ex- 
ists, is  also  presupposed  the  entire  new  moral  creation  that  proceeds 
fi'om  it ;  although  this  latter  may  yet  be  far  from  complete,  and  cati 
only  be  fully  realized  in  the  futui'e.  No  one  is  entitled  to  ask  more 
than  his  fellow  receives ;  there  being  no  human  merit  in  the  case,  all 
that  is  given  is  of  God's  free  grace  and  mercy  in  redemption.  And  it 
ajiplies  not  only  to  the  relations  of  nations  [c.  g.,  the  later  called  hea- 
then, to  the  Jews),  but  also  of  individuals. 

But  how  important  a  thing  it  is  for  us  that  a  parable  exhibiting  the 
doctrine  of  free  and  unmerited  grace,  so  strongly  put  forth  by  Paul,  has 
been  preserved  to  us  !  Taken  in  connexion  with  that  of  the  talents 
(pounds),  it  forms  a  complete  wliole  (the  two  parables  being  mutually 
complementary  to  each  other)  of  Christ's  truth  ;  on  the  one  hand,  that 
the  gifts  of  grace  are  equally  bestowed,  and  are  to  be  received  by  all 
alike  in  humility  of  heart ;  and,  on  the  other,  that  there  are  various 
stages  of  Christian  progress,  depending  upon  the  use  that  is  made  of 
the  grace  given  :  on  the  one  hand,  the  bumble  receiving  of  grace  is 
contrasted  with  the  asserting  of  one's  own  merits ;  and.  on  the  other. 
a  self-active  zeal  is  opposed  to  slothful  inactivity 

§  241.  The  Passion  for  Rewards  rebuked.  (Luke,  xvii.,  7.) 
Akin  to  the  foregoing  parable,  though  not  chronologically  connected 
with  it,  is  the  following  fragment  of  a  conversation*  in  which  Christ 
rebuked  the  prevalent  longing  of  his  disciples  for  ease  and  j-eward. 
"Which  of  you,  having  a  serva7it  ploughing,  or  feeding  cattle,  will  sai/ 
unto  him,  xchen  he  is  come  from  the  f  eld,  Co?ne  and  sit  down  to  meat'/ 

with  nie,  I  agree  with  Strauss  and  De  Wette.)  The  most  elaborate  efforts  to  harmonize 
the  passages  in  qaestion  with  the  paraWe  only  result  in  destroying  its  sense,  so  pregnant 
with  characteristic  Christian  truth.  Among  these  elaborate  attempts  must  be  reckoned 
the  inter[)rctation  recently  given  by  Wi/ke  (Urevangelist,  s.  372).  The  collocation  of  the 
parable  in  Matthew'  may  afford  a  clue  to  its  interpretation.  Peter  appears  (xix.,  27  ;  al- 
though we  prefer  Luke,  xviii.,  28)  to  have  a  passion  for  rewards,  and  the  parable  bears 
upon  such  a  disposition,  which,  by-the-way,  prevailed  at  that  time.  In  this  connexion, 
also,  tlie  words  "  Many  that  are  last  shall  be  lirst,"  &r.,  might  bear  against  measuring  by 
merit,  judging  by  appearance,  &c.  Christ  may,  perliaps,  have  spoken  tlie  words  in  tlri.s 
sense ;  though,  as  we  have  seen,  he  gave  them  another ;  but  they  cannot  bo  made  to  tit 
the  parable. 

*  Luke,  xvii.,  7,  shortly  before  tlie  account  of  the  last  journey  to  Jerusalem.  It  is  plain 
that  the  17th  chapter  begins  with  portions  of  unconnected  conversations.  We  have  already 
Been  that  v.  5,  6,  belong  to  the  period  now  before  as. 


CHRIST  ANOLNTED  BY  MARY.  351 

and  will  not.  rather  say  unto  him.  Make  ready  wherewith  I  may  si/p,  and 
gird  thyself,  and  serve  me,  till  I  have  eaten  and  drunken  ;  and  afterward 
thou  shall  cat  and  drink  1  Doth  he  thank  that  servant  for  having  done 
the  things  that  tvere  commanded  him  ?  I  trow  not.  So  likewise  ye, 
when  ye  shall  have  done  all  those  things  that  are  commanded  you,  say^ 
We  are  unprofitahlc  servants ;  we  have  done  that  which  was  our  duty 
to  doy 

Two  thoughts  are  here  presented :  First,  the  disciples  were  not  to 
expect  at  once  in  the  kingdom  of  God,  for  whose  appearance  they 
were  looking,  a  rewai'd  for  their  efforts  to  do  Christ's  will.  Their 
Master  was  first  to  enter  into  his  glory,  and  they  were  to  remain  upon 
earth  and  labour  for  him.  Then  for  them,  too,  would  come  the  time  of 
rest  and  refreshment.  Secondly,  the  servant  who  only  fulfils  his  mas- 
ter's commands  has  no  reason  to  boast,  and  no  claim  to  his  master's 
thanks  ;  he  has  only  rendered  the  duty  owed  by  a  servant  to  his  lord. 
It  is  only  when  he  goes  beyond  express  commands,  and  does  all  that 
his  master's  advantage  demands  out  of  jDure  love,  that  he  can  look  for 
thanks  ;  he  acts  then,  not  as  the  servant,  but  as  the  friend.  So  the 
Apostles,  acting  simply  as  servants  to  Christ,  were  to  call  themselves 
unprofitable  servants  after  they  had  fulfilled  his  express  commands ; 
they  lacked  as  yet  the  all-prevailing  love  that  would  of  itself,  without 
such  commands,  impel  them  to  every  service  v/hich  his  cause  required. 
This  disposition  obtained,  they  would  be  no  more  servants,  but  friends  ; 
and  all  disputes  for  rank,  all  mercenary  longing  for  rewards,  would  fall 
away.  They  would  then  never  think  that  they  had  done  enough  for 
the  Master.  To  this  spirit,  the  essence  of  genuine  Christianity,  they 
were  to  be  exalted.* 

%  242.  Christ  A?zointed  by  Mary  in  Bethany.  (John,  xii.,  1,  seq.) 
After  Christ  had  thus  prepared  the  minds  of  the  disciples  for  th« 
great  events  that  were  approaching,  he  departed,  accompanied  by  them 
only,  from  Jericho  on  the  Friday.  The  journey  thence  to  Bethany 
could  easily  be  accomplished  before  the  Sabbath,  which  he  intended  to 
spend  in  the  latter  place  with  the  family  of  Lazarus. 

He  sat  at  the  Sabbath-meal  with  the  man  whom  he  had  raised  from 
the  dead.  Again  did  the  two  sisters  manifest  their  differences  of  char- 
acter in  their  way  of  evincing  their  love  and  gratitude  to  the  Saviour.f 

»  My  view  of  the  moral  import  of  tliis  passage  agrees  with  that  of  my  dear  friend  Ju- 
lius Mailer  (Von  der  Siinde,  2'«^-  Aufl.,  i.,  48),  although  he  gives  it  a  somewhat  different 
turn.  I  differ  from  him,  however,  in  regard  to  the  bearing  of  the  passage  ;  he  applies  it 
to  the  Pharisees  rather  than  to  the  Apostles. 

t  The  narrative  of  this  remarkable  incident  is  not  only  given  by  John,  but  preserved  also 
by  Matthew  and  Mark,  though  witli  variations.  Luke  alone  says  nothing  about  it ;  but 
then  he  mentions  nothing  of  Christ's  stay  in  Bethany  at  this  interval.  Even  if  [as  some 
suppose]  the  account  which  he  gives  (vii.,  38,  seq.)  of  the  anointing  at  the  house  of  Simon 


352  LAST  PASSOV^ER  JOURNEY  TO  JERUSALEM. 

The  industrious  Martha  waited  upon  him  at  table  ;  but  Mary,  indulg- 
ing her  feelings,  and  laying  aside  all  ordinary  calculations,  anointed  the 
feet  of  Jesus  with  costly  balsam  of  spikenard,  and  wiped  them  with 
the  hair  of  her  head.*  The  disciples  knew  that  Jesus  rather  declined 
than  sought  demonstrations  of  honour  for  his  person  ;  and  perhaps  Ju- 
das, who  could  not  understand  or  appreciate  Mary's  feelings,  meant  to 
enter  into  his  views  in  this  respect  when  he  said,  ''Why  was  not  this 
ointment  sold  for  three  hundred  j^cnce,  and  given  to  the  poor  V] 

(cf.  p.  211,  seq.)  gave  occasion  for  the  omission  of  this,  it  would  not  follow  that  both  ac- 
counts record  but  one  and  the  same  fact.  Matthew  and  Mark  ditfer  from  John  in  fixiiiLr 
the  time  at  two  days  before  Easter,  instead  of  si-x;  and  in  placing  its  scene,  not  in  the 
house  of  Lazarns,  but  of  Simon  the  leper.  But  since  Matthew  and  Mark  omit  entirely  the 
history  of  Lazarus,  and  connect  the  narrative  directly  from  Jericho  to  Jerusalem,  it  is  easy 
to  explain  their  placing  this  anointing  where  they  do,  seeing  that  its  nature  was  such  as  to 
secure  its  preservation,  and  its  reference  to  Christ's  approaching  death  necessarily  as- 
signed its  chronological  position.  John  introduces  it  in  the  connexion  o{  facts.  We  see 
in  his  account  the  occasion  of  the  festive  meal,  and  of  Mary's  demonstration  of  love. 
Whether  the  transfer  of  the  scene  to  the  house  of  Simon  (in  Matthew  and  Mark)  was  occa- 
sioned by  blending  this  narrative  with  that  of  the  other  banquet  that  took  place  at  Simon's 
house,  or  by  some  other  cause,  can  not  be  decided  ;  nor  has  it  any  bearing  whatever  upon 
the  veracity  of  their  nan-ativos. 

*  In  the  other  Gospels  the  ''  washing  of  the  head"  is  mentioned  ;  that  of  the  feet  ac- 
cords more  with  Eastern  usages.  It  was  customary  for  servants  to  bring  water  to  wash 
the  feet  of  the  guests  ;  but  Mary  bathed  them  herself,  not  with  tvater,  but  with  a  costly  un- 
guent. Strauss  thinks  it  inexplicable  that  the  7iame  should  have  been  lost  in  the  other 
Gospels  if  the  woman  was  so  eminent  in  Gospel  historj-,  and  especially  as  Christ  said  the 
incident  should  be  kept  in  memorial  of  her  wherever  his  Gospel  was  preached  (Matt.,  xxvi., 
13) ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  he  supposes  that  "  this  very  saying  of  Christ  might  have  oc- 
casioned the  ascribing  of  the  act  to  a  definite  person."  To  be  sure,  it  is  as  possible  that 
the  tradition  itself  gave  name  to  the  unknown  person  at  a  later  period,  as  that  the  name 
originally  ffiven  should  be  lost.  But  that  the  one  is  more  probable  than  the  other  cannot 
be  proved  in  any  way.  Omitting  Lazarus's  history,  they  had  no  occasion  to  mention  Mary. 
The  commonness  of  the  name  (it  belonged  to  several  noted  women  in  the  New  Testameriti 
may  have  led  to  the  omission.  So  in  Luke,  x.,  38,  as  we  have  seen,  the  description  of 
Martha  and  Mary  in  their  family  circumstances,  the  place  of  their  abode,  &c.,  i."  omitted, 
although  the  very  gist  of  the  anecdote  tunia  upon  their  marked  diflferences  of  chahictcr. 
But  the  connexion  of  the  narrative  now  before  us,  with  the  approaching  death  of  Jesus, 
also  tended  to  preserve  the  locality.  And  as  John  mentions  the  name,  without  the  promise 
given  by  Matthew  (xxvi.,  13),  it  is  the  more  evident  that  the  latter  did  Jiot  cause  him  to 
invent  the  former.  His  graphic  description  is  that  of  an  eye-witness :  and  it  would  even 
be  easier  to  believe  that  Matt.,  xxvi.,  13,  was  itself  a  later  invention  than  that  John  wa.s 
led  by  it  to  invent  the  name. 

t  None  of  the  Evangelists  but  John  mention  the  name  of  Jiidas.  Strauss  thinks  that 
"  if  Judas  had  really  been  named  in  the  original  tradition,  the  name  would  not  have  been 
lost;"  and,  on  tha  other  hand,  that  "his  had  character  would  easily  lead  to  the  ascription 
of  this  bad  trait  to  him."  But  care  for  the  poor  was  not  a  likely  trait  to  ascribe  to  Judas, 
and  John  expressly  assigns  a  motive  of  his  own  for  his  language  (v.  6) ;  and  the  vciy  in- 
aptness  of  this  plea  to  Judas  may  have  caused  its  transfer  to  others.  We  certainly  can- 
not suppose  that  all,  or  many,  of  the  Apostles  made  use  of  it,  hut  the  one  who  said  it  may 
have  expressed  the  thought  of  others  ;  thoutrh  Christ's  words  do  not  necessarily  presup- 
pose this.  Little  as  we  may  be  surprised  by  various  defects  in  their  views  and  feelings  at 
that  time,  there  are  two  points  of  view  in  this  plea  that  can  hardly  be  conceived  as  used  by 
any  other  than  Judns :  (I.)  If  their  minds  were  then  full  of  anticipations  of  Christ's  glory, 
the  anointing,  as  a  demonstration  of  reverence  for  his  person,  could  not  appear  improper  to 
them;  (2.)  Or  if  their  thoughts  were  turned  to  lii>  approaching  sufferings  (which  is  not  so 


THE  ANOINTING  BY  MARY.  353 

But  Christ,  who  looks  only  at  the  heart,  saw  in  Mary's  act  an  exhi- 
bition of  that  overflowing  love  which  is  the  spring  and  source  of  true 
holiness,  and  rebuked  the  vulgar  tendency  that  wished  to  measure 
every  thing  by  its  own  standard.  "  Let  her  alone  ;  against  the  day  of 
my  burying  hath  she  kept  this  (she  has  preserved  it  for  my  embalming) ; 
she  has  shown  me  the  last  tokens  of  honour  and  affection,  not  to  be 
measured  by  vulgar  standards ;  she  knows  that  you  will  soon  have  me 
aio  more  among  you,  while  the  poor  ye  shall  have  always." 

probable),  they  could  still  less  disapprove  an  expression  of  love  for  him  whom  they  were 
BO  Boon  to  lose.    Neither  of  these  remarks  would  apply  to  Judas. 

z 


PART    11. 

FROM  THE  TRIUMPHAL  ENTRY  INTO  JERUSALEM  TO  THE 

ASCENSION. 


T 


CHAPTER  L 

FROM  THE  TRIUMPHAL  ENTRY  TO  THE  LAST  SUPPER. 
§  243.  The  Entry  into  Jerusalem* 
HE  fame  of  Christ's  acts  had  been  diffused  among  the  thousands 
of  Jews!  that  had  gathered  from  all  quarters  for  the  Passover. 
The  resurrection  of  Lazarus,  in  particular,  had  created  a  great  sensa- 
tion. As  soon  as  the  Sabbath  law  allowed,t  they  flocked  in  crowds  to 
Bethany  to  see  Jesus,  and  especially  to  convince  themselves  of  the  res- 
urrection of  Lazarus  by  ocular  evidence  and  inquiry  on  the  spot.  Per- 
haps on  Sunday  morning,  too,  before  Christ  went  to  Jerusalem,  many 
had  gone  out.§ 

*  We  must  here  account  for  the  chronologj-  that  we  adopt.  We  set  out  with  the  pre- 
supposition (for  which  reasons  wiO  be  given  hereafter)  that  the  beginning'  of  the  Passover, 
14th  Nisan,  occurred  in  that  year  on  a  Friday.  Now  John,  xii.,  1,  gives  a  fixed  mark — 
Clirist's  arrival  at  Bethany  six  days  before  the  Passover  ;  which  six  days  maj-  include  that 
which  forms  the  terminus  a  quo,  and  also  the  terminus  ad  quern.  If  he  included  the  first,  Christ 
reached  Bethany  on  the  Sabbath  ;  not  verj-  likely,  as  he  was  wont  to  avoid  the  charge  of  vio- 
lating the  Mosaic  law  except  in  cases  of  urgent  necessitj*.  If  he  included  both  daj-s,  Christ 
reached  Bethany  on  the^r*^  daj-  of  the  week.  But  then  the  Passover  caravan  must  have 
reached  Jericho  on  Sabbath,  or  on  Fridaj-,  remaining  there  on  Sabbath,  which  is  not  prob- 
able, from  the  general  tenor  of  the  separate  accounts.  The  only  supposition  that  avoids 
these  diiBculties  is  that  John  included  neither  of  the  two  days,  and  that  Christ  arrived  in 
Bethany  on  Friday.  (Cf  note,  p.  281.)  B-  Jacobi  supposes  that  Christ  arrived  so  late  on 
Friday  that  the  Sabbath  had  begun,  and  John,  therefore,  regarded  Friday  as  past;  this  sup 
position  would  remove  the  difficulty  without  altering  the  chronology". 

t  By  a  census  taken  under  Nero,  2,700,000  men  gathered  at  Jerusalem  to  the  Passover 
Joseph.,  B.  J.,  vi,  9,  $  3. 

X  The  Sabbath-day's  journey  allowed  by  the  law  was  1000  paces ;  but  Bethany  was 
twice  that  far  from  Jerusalem.  The  habit  was  to  walk  the  first  1000  on  Sabbath  before 
sunset;  the  others  afterward. 

ij  John,  xLi.,  9, 13.  According  to  the  other  Evangelists,  Jesus  came  on  the  same  day  witli 
the  multitude  from  Jericho.  The  difficulty  is  not  wholly  inexplicable  ;  nor  does  it  affect  the 
substance  of  the  narrative.  It  is  possible  to  distinguish  (as  Schleiermacher  and  others  doi 
tico  entries  of  Christ  into  the  city  ;  the  first  being  described  in  the  first  three  Gospels,  the 
second  in  John.  According  to  this  view,  he  entered  first  with  the  caravan  towards  even 
itig,  and  a  great  sensation  was  produced  ;  thence  he  went  immediately  to  Bethany,  and 
on  the  next  morning  (according  to  our  view,  the  second  day  after)  returned  to  the  city,  the 
fame  of  his  works  having,  in  the  mean  time,  been  still  more  widely  bruited  among  the  peo- 
ple ;  the  second  entrj-,  expected  and  prepared  for.  causing  much  greater  excitement  than 
the  first  unannounced  and  anexpected  one.    But  in  this  case  we  should  have  to  admit  that 


THE  TRIUMPHAL  ENTRY.  355 

The  question  may  arise  whether  the  triumphal  entry  into  Jerusalem 
was  part  of  Christ's  plan,  or  not.  It  is  certainly  possible,  from  the  cir- 
cumstances just  mentioned,  that  it  was  unsought  on  his  part.  But  had 
such  really  been  the  case,  he  would  have  avoided  the  multitude,  and 
entered  the  city  quietly  and  privately,  as  he  could  easily  have  done. 
Had  he  not  had  higher  interests  in  view,  he  must  have  avoided  a  mode 
of  entry  which  confirmed  the  opinion  that  he  claimed  to  be  more  than' 
a  mere  teacher,  and  which  would  afford  so  excellent  a  handle  to  his 
enemies.  We  do  not,  indeed,  look  upon  it  as  brought  about  by  any 
management  on  his  part,  but  as  a  natural  result  of  the  circumstances, 
as  a  final  and  necessary  link  in  a  chain  of  consecutive  events.  We 
regard  it,  therefore,  as  foreseen  and  embraced  in  his  plan  ;  and  his  plan 
was  nothing  else  but  the  will  of  his  Father,  which  he  fulfilled  as  a  free 
oi-gan.  He  wished  to  yield  to  the  enthusiasm  of  the  people,  transient 
as  he  knew  it  would  be  in  most  of  them,  and  thus  to  testify,  in  the  face 
of  the  nation  and  of  mankind,  that  the  kingdom  of  God  had  come,  and 
that  he  was  the  pi'omised  Theocratic  King.  And  this  was  the  result 
of  his  previous  labours,  brought  about  by  the  Divine  guidance.  If  he 
had  not  before,  in  the  same  direct  and  public  way,  proclaimed  himself 
Messiah,  he  now  did  it  before  the  eyes  of  all,  most  publicly  and  striking- 
ly. This  triumphant  entry  was  the  reply  to  many  questions ;  a  reply 
which  shut  out  all  doubt ;  it  was,  in  a  word,  a  world-historical  event.* 

the  two  narratives  had  been  blended  ;  parts  that  belonged  to  the  second,  as  given  by  John, 
being  transfeiTed  to  the  first.  As  the  other  Gospels  (Mark  especially)  relate  that  he  ar- 
rived late  in  the  evening  at  the  city,  and  went  directly  thence  to  Bethany,  there  appears 
good  ground  for  the  supposition.  The  statement  of  the  other  Evangelists  (his  going  to 
Bethany)  suits  exactly  John's  account  of  his  relations  with  the  family  of  Lazarus. 

But  yet,  if  our  mode  of  viewing  the  Gospels  be  correct,  it  may  very  well  have  been  in- 
ferred— the  naiTative  of  the  entry  being  separately  transmitted,  and  the  supposition  natu- 
rally arising  that  he  came  directly  with  the  caravan  from  Jericho — that  the  Messianic  en- 
try took  place  immediately  on  his  arrival. 

*  It  may  be  matter  of  question  what  features  of  the  entrj'  belonged  to  Christ's  plan,  and 
what  were  brought  about  entirely  by  the  circumstances.  To  admit  that  any  of  them  be- 
longed to  the  latter  class  would  not  deprive  them  of  significance  ;  the  developement  of  the 
circumstances  themselves,  apart  from  Christ's  immediate  intention,  or  in  connexion  there- 
with, might  adapt  theni  to  sj^mbolize  the  appearance  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  From  John, 
xii.,  14,  we  learn  that  Christ,  finding  the  throng  so  great,  seated  himself  upon  an  ass  found 
just,  at  hand,  which  act  was  subsequently  referred  to  Zach.,  ix.,  9,  and  the  nairative 
somewhat  modified  accordingly,  as,  indeed,  is  seen  in  Matthew  (xxi.,  2-7),  where  two  beasts 
are  mentioned,  from  a  misapprehension  of  the  passage  in  Zachariah,  following  the  Alex- 
andrian version.  It  is  to  be  carefully  observed  that  John,  xii.,  16,  makes  a  clear  distinc- 
tion between  the  view  of  this  event  taken  by  the  disciples  at  the  time,  from  that  in  which 
they  regarded  it  at  a  later  period,  when  all  had  been  fulfilled,  and  they  had  seen  Jesus  as 
the  glorified  Messiah  ;  showing  that  what  at  first  appeared  to  be  only  accidental  after- 
ward gained  a  higher  significance.  None  but  an  eye-witness  would  have  made  such  a 
distinction  at  the  time  when  this  Gospel  was  written.  If  this  should  be  taken  as  imply- 
inir  that  the  ass  was  accidentally  there  (though  it  by  no  means  necessarily  implies  this), 
the  use  of  the  animal  is  not  thereby  rendered  the  less  significant,  or  a  less  apt  fulfilment 
of  the  Messianic  prophecy.  But.  on  the  other  hand,  the  other  Gospels  represent  the  act 
as  iidenlional  on  Christ's  [)art ;  not,  however,  as  kltrauss  will  have  it,  miraculous.    It  is 


356  THE  TRIUMPHAL  ENTRY. 

Attended  by  his  disciples  and  the  host  that  had  gathered  into  Beth- 
any, Christ  set  out  for  Jerusalem.  Many  more  advanced  to  meet  him 
from  the  city,  and  were  hailed  by  those  who  had  been  with  Christ 
with  the  assurance  that  Lazarus  had  indeed  been  raised  from  the  dead. 
In  the  increasing  throng,  Christ  mounted  an  ass  which  he  found  at  hand, 
for  his  own  convenience,  and  that  the  people  might  see  him.  And  thus 
the  natural  course  of  circumstances  aptly  symbolized  the  peaceable 
character  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  its  total  rejection  of  worldly 
pomp  and  display,  as  typified  by  the  Prophet  Zachariah  (ix.,  9).  With 
joyous  songs  and  shoutings  he  was  introduced  into  the  city  as  Mes- 
siah, while  on  all  sides  was  heard  the  loud  acclaim,  "  Hosanna !  Jeho- 
vah prosper  him  !  Blessed  is  he  that  cometh  in  the  name  of  Jehovah" 
(Ps.  cxviii.,  25,  26).  Some  Pharisees  among  the  multitude,  who  were 
perhaps  not  fully  decided  in  their  opinions,  though  recognizing  Jesus 
as  a  great  teacher,  were  displeased  that  he  was  thus  proclaimed  Mes- 
siah on  entering  the  city,  and  asked  him  to  silence  his  followers.  He 
answered,  "  I  tell  you,  if  these  sJiould  hold  their  peace,  the  stones  would 
cry  out."*  An  event  had  occurred,  so  lofty  and  so  pregnant  with  the 
best  interests  of  mankind,  that  it  might  rouse  even  the  dullest  to  re- 
joice. In  the  mouth  of  any  other,  even  the  greatest  of  7nen,  these 
words  would  have  been  an  unjustifiable  self-exaltation  ;  uttered  by  Him., 
they  show  the  weighty  import  which  he  gave  to  his  manifestation. 
Christ's  conduct  in  this  respect,  moreover,  shows  that  such  an  entry 
into  Jerusalem  formed  part  of  his  plan. 

§  244.  Sadness  oj"  Christ  at  Sight  of  Jerusalem.  (Luke,  xix.,  41-44.) 
With  what  sorrow  must  that  heart,  so  full  of  love,  so  overflowing 
with  pity  for  the  misery  of  men,  have  been  wrung  as  he  approached 
for  the  last  time  the  City  whose  people  he  had  so  often  summoned  in 
vain  to  repent,  the  metropolis  of  the  earthly  Theocracy — soon  to  be  left 
to  deserved  destruction,  from  which  he  could  not  save  it,  because  His 
voice  was  not  listened  to  !  With  tears  he  cried,  "  If  thou  hadst  known, 
even  thon,  at  least  in  this  thy  day,  the  things  icliic]},  belong  unto  thy 
■peace  !  hut  now  they  are  hid  from  thine  eyes."  And  then  he  uttered  a 
prophecy  (v.  43,  44)  which  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  afterward 
abundantly  verified. 

Although  Christ,  doubtless,  went  immediately  on  his  entry  to  the 

not  ftt  all  impossible  to  harmonize  Joha's  accoant  with  that  of  the  other  Evan^^elists;  the 
word  ivpt^v  ill  V.  14  does  not  of  necessity  define  the  way  in  which  Christ  obtained  the  ass; 
and  John  states  many  points  very  concisely.  In  the  mean  time,  it  is  a  question  which  ac- 
count is  the  most  simple. 

*  Luke,  xix.,  39.  If  we  suppose  there  were  two  entines  (which  this  passage  appears, 
though  not  necessarily,  to  favour),  these  words  wonld  refer  to  the  first ;  and  the  Pharisees 
probably  accompanied  the  Passover  caravan  from  Galilee. 


THE  FIG-TREE  CURSED.  357 

Temple  to  thank  God,  it  does  not  follow  that  we  must  place  here  the 
expulsion  of  the  buyers  and  sellers.* 

During  the  few  remaining  days  of  his  ministry  on  earth,  he  made 
use  of  the  favourable  temper  of  the  people  to  impress  their  minds  with 
his  teaching.  In  the  moraings  he  taught  in  the  Temple ;  the  rest  of 
the  day  was  given  to  the  disciples,  with  whom,  in  the  evening,  he  was 
wont  to  retire  to  Bethany. 

§  245.  The  Fig-tree  Cursed.  (Matt.,  xxi.,  18  ;  Mark,  xi.,  12.)— Para- 
ble of  the  Fig-tree.     (Luke,  xiii.,  6-9.) 

A  remarkable  occurrence  in  this  part  of  the  history  must  now  be  ex- 
amined somewhat  closely.  Christ,  returning  with  his  disciples  in  the 
morning  from  Bethany  to  Jerusalem,  became  hungry,  and  saw  at  a  dis- 
tance a  fig-tree  in  full  leaf.  At  that  season  of  the  year  such  a  tree 
might  be  expected,  in  full  foliage,  to  bear  fruit  ;t  and  he  walked  to- 
wards it  to  pluck  off  the  figs.  Finding  none,  he  said,  "  No  man  cat 
fruit  of  thee  hereafter  forever."  On  the  second  morning,!  the  disciples, 
coming  the  same  way,  were  astonished  to  find  the  fig-tree  withered. 

In  what  light  is  this  fact  to  be  regarded  1  Shall  we  see  in  it  the  im- 
mediate result  of  Christ's  words  ;  in  fact,  a  miracle,  as  Matthew's  state- 
ment appears  to  imply  ]  All  his  other  miracles  were  acts  of  love, 
acts  of  giving  and  creation  ;  this  would  be  a  punitive  and  destroying 
miracle,  falling,  too,  upon  a  natural  object,  to  which  no  guilt  could  cling. 
It  would  certainly  be  at  variance  with  all  other  peculiar  operations  of 
Christ,  who  came,  in  every  respect,  "  not  to  destroy,  but  to  fulfil." 
Shall  we  conceive  that  the  coincidence  \^'ith  Christ's  words  was  merely 
accidental — a  view  which  suits  Mark's  statement  better  than  Mat- 
thew's 1  If  so,  we  shall  find  it  impossible  to  extract  from  Christ's  words, 
twist  them  as  we  may,  a  sense  worthy  of  him. 

The  proper  rnedium  is  to  be  found  in  the  symbolical  meaning  of  the 
act.  If  the  miracles  generally  have  a  symbolical  import  (and  we  have 
shown  that  in  some  it  is  particularly  pi-ominent),  v/e  have  in  this  case 
one  that  is  cutirehj  symbolical.  The  fig-tree,  rich  in  foliage,  but  desti- 
tute of  fruit,  represents  the  Jewish  people,  so  abundant  in  outward 

*  According  to  Matt.,  xxi.,  15,  16,  the  displeasure  of  the  priests  was  kindled  when  the 
children  cried  "Hosanna!"  in  the  Temple.  Jesus  said  to  them,  "Have  j'e  never  read,  Out 
of  the  mouths  of  babes  and  sucklings  hast  thou  ordained  praise?''  (Ps.  viii.,  3).  This  inci- 
dent might  be  confounded  with  the  one  before  quoted  from  Luke  ;  but  it  has  features  es- 
sentially different.  The  haughty  scribes  are  here  offended  because  children,  rejoice,  and 
Christ  replies,  in  effect,  "  The  glory  of  God  is  revealed  to  children,  while  the  chiefs  of  the 
hierarchy,  in  the  pride  of  their  imagined  wisdom,  receive  no  impressions  into  their  cold  and 
unsusceptible  hearts." 

t  See  article  "Feige,"  in  Winer's  Realworterbuch.  The  remark  in  Mark,  xi.,  13, 
"The  time  of  figs  was  not  yet,"  presents  a  difficulty ;  the  whole  significance  of  the  naira- 
tive  lies  in  the  fact  that  the  tree  might  be  expected  to  bear  fruit,  but  was  destitute  of  it. 

X  I  follow  here  Mark's  statement,  which  seems  to  me  to  be  the  most  original  in  this  par 
ticular. 


358  CHRIST  AT  JERUSALEM. 

shows  of  piety,  but  destitute  of  its  reality.  Their  vital  sap  was  squan- 
dered ujion  leaves.  And  as  the  fruitless  tree,  failing  to  realize  the  aim 
of  its  being,  was  destroyed ;  so  the  Theocratic  nation,  for  the  same 
reason,  was  tabe  overtaken,  after  long  forbearance,  by  the  judgments 
of  God,  and  shut  out  from  his  kingdom. 

The  prophets  were  accustomed  to  convey  both  instructions  and 
warnings  by  symbolical  acts  ;  and  the  purport  of  this  act,  as  both  warn- 
ing and  pi-ediction,  was  pi^ecisely  suited  to.  the  time.  But  to  under- 
stand Christ's  act  aright,  we  must  not  conceive  that  he  at  once  caused 
a  sound  tree  to  wither.  This  would  not,  as  we  have  said,  be  in  har- 
mony with  the  general  aim  of  his  miracles ;  nor  would  it  correspond 
to  the  idea  which  he  designed  to  set  vividly  before  the  disciples.  A 
sound  tree,  suddenly  destroyed,  would  certainly  be  no  fitting  type  of 
the  Jewish  people.  We  must  rather  believe  that  the  same  cause  which 
made  the  tree  barren  had  already  prepared  the  way  for  its  destruction, 
and  that  Christ  only  hastened  a  crisis  vi^hich  had  to  come  in  the  course 
of  nature.  In  this  view  it  would  correspond  precisely  to  the  great 
event  in  the  world's  histoi'y  which  it  was  designed  to  prefigure  :  the 
moral  character  of  the  Jewish  nation  had  long  been  fitting  it  foi'  de- 
struction ;  and  the  Divine  government  of  the  world  only  brought  on  tlie 
crisis. 

It  is  ti"ue,  no  explanation  on  the  part  of  Christ  is  added  in  the  ac- 
count of  the  event  above  related,  although  we  may  readily  believe  that 
the  disciples  were  not  so  capable  of  apprehending  his  meaning,  or  so 
inclined  to  do  it,  as  to  stand  in  need  of  no  explanation.  But  we  find 
such  an  explanation  in  the  parable  of  the  harrcn  Jig-trce  (Luke,  xiii., 
6-9),  which  evidently  corresponds  to  the  fact  that  we  just  unfolded. 
As  the^ac^  is  wanting  in  Luke,  and  the  parable  in  Matthew  and  Mark, 
we  have  additional  reason  to  infer  such  a  correspondence.  We  can- 
not conclude,  with  some,  that  the  narrative  of  the  fact  was  merely 
framed  from  an  embodiment  of  the  parable  ;  nor  that  the  fact  itself,  so 
definitely  i-elated,  was  purely  ideal ;  but  we  find  in  the  cori-espondenc'e 
of  the  two  an  intimation  that  idea  and  history  go  here  together;  and 
that,  according  to  the  prevailing  tendencies  of  the  persons  who  trans- 
mitted the  accounts,  the  one  or  the  other  was  thrown  into  the  back- 
ground. 

It  may  be  a  question  whether  the  words  of  Christ  (Matt.,  xxi.,  21  ; 
Mark,  xi.,  23)  on  the  power  of  faith  to  "  remove  mountains"  really  be- 
long in  this  connexion.  Against  it  is  the  fact  that  tl^e  miracle  proper  was 
really  subordinate,  and  that  the  faith  of  the  disciples  was  to  show  its  pow- 
er in  modes  very  different  from  that  illustrated  by  the  fact.  But  if  the 
words  are  to  be  taken  in  this  connexion,  we  must  suppose  that,  after  the 


PLOTS  OF  THE  PHARISEES.  359 

attention  of  tlie  disciples  had  been  drawn  to  tlie  subordinate  feature  (the 
withering  of  tlie  tree),  Christ  made  use  of  their  astonishment  for  a  pur- 
pose very  important  in  this  last  period  of  his  stay  with  them,  viz.,  to  in- 
cite them  to  act  of  themselves  by  the  power  of  God  ;  not  to  be  so 
amazed  at  what  He  wi'ought  with  that  power,  but  to  remember  that  in 
communion  with  him  they  would  be  able  to  do  the  same,  and  even 
greater  things.  The  sense  of  his  words  then  would  be  :  "  You  need 
not  wonder  at  a  result  like  this  ;  the  result  was  the  least  of  it ;  you 
shall  do  still  greater  things  by  the  power  of  God,  if  you  only  possess 
the  great  essential,  Faith." 

If  we  adopted  this  view,  we  should  be  disposed  to  consider  Luke, 
xvii.,  6,  as  the  original  form  of  Christ's  language  with  regard  to  the 
lig-tree ;  and  to  suppose  that  in  Matthew  and  Mark  different  expres- 
sions, conveying  similar  thoughts,  had  been  blended  together.  Yet 
it  cannot  be  asserted  that  the  view  itself  is  altogether  well  supported. 
Perhaps  it  may  have  been  the  case  that  the  original  form  of  Christ's 
words  in  explanation  of  the  miracle  was  lost ;  its  symbolical  import, 
which  is  really  its  chief  import,  was  made  subordinate  to  the  miracle 
itself;  and  another  expression  of  Christ,  better  adapted  to  this  concep- 
tion of  the  fact,  was  brought  into  connexion  with  it. 

§  246.  Mackinatio7is  of  the  Pharisees. 

The  sensation  created  by  the  raising  of  Lazarus  had,  as  we  have 
seen,  quickened  the  resolution  to  which  the  more  hasty  portion  of  th6 
Sanhedrim  had  long  been  inclined,  to  put  Jesus  out  of  the  way.  The 
time  and  mode  of  its  execution  depended  upon  the  fact  and  the  man- 
ner of  his  entering  the  city ;  and  men  of  all  classes  waited  anxiously 
to  see  whether  he  would  dare  openly  to  face  his  enemies.  Before  his 
arrival,  the  Sanhedrim  ordered  that  any  one  who  should  ascertain  his 
place  of  abode  should  inform  them  of  it,  that  measures  might  be  taken 
for  his  arrest,* 

The  triumphant  Messianic  entry  of  Christ,  amid  the  shouts  of  the 
enthusiastic  multitude,  was  an  unexpected  blow  to  the  hierarchical 
party.  "  See,"  said  they  in  anger,  "  hoiv  ye  prevail  nothing  !  behold,  the 
world  is  gone  after  him  !"t  They  now  determined  to  make  use  of  craft. 
We  cannot  decide,  from  the  brief  intimations  of  the  Evangelists, 
whether  they  first  intended  to  make  use  of  the  Sicarii,^  who  at  that  lime 
were  employed  frequently  by  the  unprincipled  heads  of  parties  ;  or 
whether  it  was  their  plan  from  the  beginning  to  get  him  into  their  power 
by  stratagem,  and  then  have  him  condemned  under  the  forms  of  law. 
This  last  would  be  more  in  consonance  with  their  usual   hypocrisy. 

*  John,  xi.,  56,  57.  f  Ibid.,  xii.,  19. 

J  Matt.,  xxvi.,  4.  It  cannot  be  well  decided  whether  u-roKTchav  refers  to  assassination 
or  to  leeal  murder. 


360  CHRIST  AT  JERUSALEM. 

Doubtless  the  pleas  and  accusations  to  be  employed  were  all  ready ; 
abundant  mateiial  had  been  gathered  from  Christ's  labours  both  in 
Galilee  and  Jerusalem,  Still,  they  must  have  welcomed  any  new  de- 
veloperaents  which  might  seiTe  to  justify  his  condemnation  on  the 
ground  of  Jewish  law,  or  to  present  him  to  the  Roman  authorities  as  a 
culprit.* 

§  247.  Comliination  of  the  Pharisees  and  Hcrod'ians. —  ChrisVs  Decision 
on  paying  Tribute  to  Ccesar. 

Besides  the  Pharisaical  party,  there  was  another  among  the  Jews  at 
that  time,  the  Herodians,  a  political  rather  than  religious  party,  whose 
greatest  care  was  to  preserve  the  public  quiet,  and  avoid  all  occasions 
of  offence  to  the  Romans.  These  two  parties  now  combined  against 
Christ  ;t  not  the  first  or  the  last  instance  in  history  in  which  priests 
have  made  use  of  politicians,  even  otherwise  opposed  to  them,  to  crush 
a  reformer  whose  zeal  might  be  inimical  to  both. 

A  question  was  proposed  to  Christ,  apparently  out  of  respect  to  his 
authority,  but  really  with  a  view  to  draw  such  an  answer  fi-om  him  as 
would  offend  either  the  hierarchs  or  politicians :  "  Master,  toe  know 
that  thou  art  true  ;  for  thou  regardest  not  the  person  of  men,  hut  tcachest 
the  way  of  God  in  truth  :  is  it  laivful  to  give  tribute  to  Ccesar,  or  not  V'\ 
A  denial  of  the  obligation  would  subject  him  to  accusation  before  the 
Roman  authoi'ities  as  a  man  politically  dangerous,  and  a  ringleader  of 
rebellion.  To  acknowledge  it,  might  lay  him  open  to  the  charge  of  de- 
grading the  dignity  of  the  Tiieociatic  nation.     Asking  for  a  Roman 

*  In  order  to  obtain  an  exact  view  of  the  events  that  preceded  aod  contributed  to  the 
death  of  Chri:;t,  we  must  compare  the  synoptical  accounts  with  that  of  John.  The  former, 
however,  collecting  into  the  space  of  a  few  days  events  which,  according  to  John,  occurred 
at  various  points  of  time,  leave  many  gaps  and  obscurities.  Pliarisaical  plots  and  schemes 
that  were,  perhaps,  going  on  for  years,  are  all  transferred  to  this  period.  According  to  the 
synoptical  accounts,  the  Sanhedrim  sent  a  deputatioji  to  Christ  while  he  taught  publicly  iu 
the  Temple,  asking  his  authority  for  so  doing.  Christ,  seeing  that  they  only  meant  to  en- 
snare him,  replied  by  a  question  that  was  rather  dangerous  for  them  :  •'  The  baptism  of 
John,  whence  was  it?  from  heaven,  or  of  men  V  (Matt.,  xxi.,  :;5),  Their  interests  would  be 
prejudiced  by  admitting  it  to  be  "from  heaven  ;"  their  fear  of  alienating  the  people,  who 
revered  John  as  a  prophet,  forbade  them  to  say  it  was  "of  men."  Thej'  therefore  evaded 
the  question,  and  Christ  declared  himself  to  be  thereby  justified  in  refusing  to  answer 
theirs.  In  this  statement  itself  there  is  nothing  improbable;  the  only  possible  doubt  is  as 
to  its  chronological  connexion.  Could  the  Sanhedrim  have  sent  such  a  deputation  to  Christ 
at  a  time  when  matters  had  gone  so  far  as  John's  account  reprcseiits  them  ?  The  question 
proposed  cannot  but  remind  us  of  that  offered  to  Christ  (John,  ii.,  18)  at  the  beginning  of 
his  ministry  ;  the  answer  reminds  us,  also,  of  Christ's  appeal,  at  an  earlier  period,  to  the 
testimony  of  John  the  Baptist.  Without  venturing  to  decide  the  point,  we  may  suggest 
that  the  chronology  is  at  fault.  And,  at  any  rate,  the  obscurity  in  the  connexion  of  events 
in  the  synoptical  Gospels,  arising  from  the  omission  of  Christ's  previous  labours  in  Jerusa- 
lem, makes  it  neccssarj-  for  us  to  fill  them  uj)  from  John's  definite  historical  outline.  Matt., 
xxi.,  4G,  recalls  forcibly  John's  statements  of  similar  facts  before  occurring  in  the  city. 

t  Mark,  iii.,  6,  perhaps  implies  that  this  union  was  formed  at  an  eai'lier  period. 

%  Mark,  xii.,  14,  15. 


PLOTS  OF  THE  PHARISEES.  361 

denarius,  lie  inquired,  "  Whose  is  this  image  and  superscription  ?" 
"Caesar's."  The  very  currency  of  the  coin  implied  an  acknowledg- 
ment of  the  political  dependence  of  the  nation  upon  the  Roman  Em- 
pire, and  of  the  obligations  that  flowed  from  such  dependence.  This 
conclusion  he  uttered  in  very  few  words :  "  Render  unto  CceSar  the 
things  that  are  Ccesar^s,  and  to  God  the  things  that  are  God\s." 

These  words  imply  that  it  was  not  Christ's  calling  to  alter  the  rela- 
tions and  duties  of  civil  society.  Had  he  meant  to  represent  himself 
as  Messiah  in  the  sense  of  Messiahship  held  by  the  Pharisees,  he  must 
have  given  a  different  reply  ;  but  his  answer  taught  them  that  their  ob- 
ligations to  Caesar  were  not  inconsistent  with  their  duties  to  GJ-od  ;  on 
the  contrary,  that  the  latter  constituted  the  basis  of  the  former.  At 
the  same  time,  it  reminded  them  of  a  duty  to  which  they  were  most 
unfaithful,  viz.,  to  give  tndy  to  God  what  is  God's  ;  as  man,  hearing  the 
stamp  of  his  image,  belongs  to  him^  and  should  he  dedicated  to  him. 
And  the  "  giving  to  God  what  is  God's"  not  only  affords  the  basis,  but 
also  fixes  the  just  limitations  of  the  civil  obliga,tions  growing  out  of  re- 
lations brought  about  by  Divine  Providence. 

§  248.  Christ's  Reply  to  the  Sadducecs  about  the  Resurrection.  (Matt., 
xxii.,  23,  seq. ;   Mark,  xii.,  18;   Luke,  xx.,  27.) 

Between  the  spirit  of  Christ  and  that  of  the  Sadducees  there  was, 
as  we  have  already  seen,*  nothing  in  common.  But  although  that 
party  generally  paid  little  heed  to  popular  religious  movements,  and 
had  as  yet  hardly  noticed  Christ,  their  attention,  and  even  their  favour, 
was  drawn  to  him  by  the  opposition  of  the  Pharisees.  His  happy  de- 
feat of  the  schemes  of  the  latter  induced  the  Sadducees  to  tempt  him 
with  a  question  in  regard  to  maniage  in  the  resurrection,  which  might, 
perhaps,  embarrass  him  on  the  ground  that  he  occupied.  But  with 
them,  as  with  the  Pharisees,  he  struck  at  the  root,  and  traced  their  er- 
rors to  ignorance  of  the  Scriptures  and  of  the  omnipotence  of  God. 
Had  they  known  the  Scriptures,  he  showed  them  (even  the  law,  which 
they  acknowledged,  for  he  quoted  out  of  Exodus),  not  only  in  the  letter, 
but  the  spirit,  they  could  not  fail  tosee  a  necessary  connexion  between 
the  faith  revealed  there  and  the  doctrine  of  an  eternal,  individual 
life  for  man  (v.  31,  32).  Had  they  known  the  omnipotence  of  God, 
they  would  not  have  supposed  that  the  forms  and  relations  of  the  pres- 
ent life  must  be  preserved  in  the  future  ;  God  could  bestow  the  new 
existence  in  a  far  different,  nay,  in  a  glorified  form  (v.  29,  30). 

He  thus  refuted  the  Sadducees,  both  negatively  and  positively.  Neg- 
atively, by  showing  that  their  question  went  on  the  false  hypothesis 
that  the  forms  and  relations  of  the  present  sensible  life  would  be  trans- 
ferred to  the  future  spiritual  one  ;  and  positively,  by  showing  the  ea- 

*  Cf.  p.  35. 


36-2  CHRIST  AT  JERUSALEM. 

sential  import  of  tlie  declaration  in  the  Pentateuch,  "  I  a77i  tJie  God  of 
Abraham,  and  the  God  of  Isaac,  and  the  God  of  Jacob  J  ^  How  could 
God  place  himself  in  so  near  a  relation  to  individual  men,  and  ascribe 
to  them  so  high  a  dignity,  if  they  were  mere  perishable  appearances ; 
if  they  had  not  an  essence  akin  to  his  own,  and  destined  for  imm«»r- 
tality  ? 

We  must  bear  in  mind  here  the  emphatic  sense  in  which  Christ  con- 
trasts the  "dead"  and  the  "living;"  a  sense  which  is  evident  (apart 
from  John's  Gospel)  in  the  passage,  "  Let  the  dead  bury  their  dead.''* 
It  is  in  this  emphatic  sense  that  he  says,  "  God  is  not  the  God  of  the 
dead,  but  of  the  living"\  (v,  32).  The  living  God  can  only  be  conceived 
as  the  God  of  the  living.  And  this  argument,  derived  from  the  The- 
ocratic basis  of  the  Old  Testament,  is  founded  upon  a  more  general 
one,  viz.,  the  connexion  between  the  consciousness  of  God  and  that  of 
immortality.  Man  could  not  become  conscious  of  God  as  his  God,  if 
he  were  not  a  personal  spirit,  divinely  allied,  and  destined  for  eternity, 
an  eternal  object  (as  an  individual)  of  God;  and  thereby  far  above  all 
natural  and  perishable  beings,  whose  perpetuity  is  that  of  the  species, 
not  the  individual. 

It  is  worthy  of  remark,  that  Christ  does  not  enter  further  into  llie 
faith  of  immortality  as  defined  in  the  belief  of  the  resurrection;  his 
opponents  could  not  appreciate  the  latter  until  they  had  been  made  to 
feel  the  need  of  the  former. 

§  249.  Christ's  Exjwsition  of  the  First  and  Great  Commandment. — 
(Mark,  xii.,  28-34.) 

The  promptness  with  which  Chiist  silenced  the  Pharisees  and  Sad- 
ducees  inclined  towards  him  many  of  the  bettei--minded.|  One  of 
these,  who  felt  himself  compelled  to  acknowledge  Jesus  as  a  witness 
of  truth,  if  not  as  Messiah,  put  a  question  to  him  in  good  faith,  in  order 
to  make  known  his  agreement  of  sentiment  with  him  :§  "Which  is  the 
first  commandment  of  all  V  And  when  Christ  rei)lied  that  all  the 
commandments  were  implied  in  two  "  the  supieme  love  of  God,  and 
the  love  of  one's  neighbour  as  one's  self,"  he  assented  with  all  his  heait, 
declaring  that  this  was,  indeed,  more  than  "  all  whole  burnt- ofTerings  and 
sacrifices."  ,  Jesus,  whose  loving  heart  always  welcomed  the  germs  of 

•  Cf  p.  310. 

t  The  quibbles  of  the  Rabbinical  writers  on  this  passage,  compared  with  Christ's  pro- 
found sayinij,  ilhistrate  the  proverb,  "Duo  cum  dicunt  idem,  noii  est  idem." 

t  So,  rt  the  ronncil  of  Costuitz,  when  John  Huss,  the  witness  for  Christ  and  truth,  was 
condemned  by  a  majority  of  scribes  and  priests,  there  were  yet  a  few  among  the  multi- 
tude of  better  s[)irit,  who  were  moved  by  the  power  of  truth  in  his  replies  and  conduct, 
and  manifested  their  sympathy. 

§  We  follow  Mark  rather  than  Matthevy,  who  represents  the  question  as  put  in  a  hostile 
spirit.  Mark's  description  coincides  with  Luke,  xx.,  39,  where  certain  of  the  scribcB  are 
represented  as  expressing  their  assent  to  the  Saviour's  answers. 


THE  GOOD  SAMARITAN.  363 

truth  and  goodness,  praisod  the  spirit  of  the  man's  reply,  saying,  "  Thou 
art  not  Jar  from  the  kingdom  of  God."  And  in  this  he  intended  no 
more  and  no  less  than  the  words  themselves  conveyed.  Had  he  con- 
sidered an  earnest  moral  striving,  such  as  this  man  expressed,  to  he  suffi- 
cient, he  would  have  acknowledged  him  as  not  only  near,  hut  m  the 
kingdom  of  God.  He  tells  him,  however,  that  he  is  on  the  way  to  it, 
because  he  was  freed  from  the  Pharisaic  delusion  of  the  righteousness 
of  works,  and  knew  the  nature  of  genuine  piety ;  and  could,  therefore, 
more  readily  be  convinced  of  what  he  still  lacked  of  the  spirit  of  the 
law,  which  he  so  well  understood.  The  conscious  need  of  redemption, 
thus  awakened,  would  lead  him  to  the  only  source  whence  his  wants 
could  be  supplied. 

§  250.    The  Parable  of  the  Good  Samaritan.     (Luke,  x.,  25,  seq.) 

We  here  deviate  a  moment  from  chronological  order,  to  introduce  a 
similitude  germane  to  the  conversation  just  set  forth.  It  is  remarkable 
that  Luke  omits  that  conversation  and  gives  the  jjarable  of  the  good 
Samaritan*  which  is  obviously  akin  to  it  in  import,  and  is,  in  turn, 
omitted  by  the  other  Evangelists.  Perhaps  in  this,  as  in  other  cases 
already  mentioned,!  the  Evangelists  divided  the  matter  among  them,  in 
view  of  this  very  congeniality  of  meaning. 

The  parable  introduces  a  man  asking  Christ  what  he  must  do  to  in- 
herit eternal  life.  We  might  infer  from  Luke's  statement  that  his  mo- 
tives were  bad  ;  but  the  narrative  does  not  confirm  this  view,  although 
Christ's  reply  does  not  place  him  beside  the  man  who  was  "  near"  the 
kingdom  of  God.  He  was  one  of  the  vo[j,tKoi  (lawyers),  who,  as  we 
have  said  (p.  247,  note),  differed  from  the  Pharisees  ip  occupying  them- 
selves more  with  ihe  original  wi-itings  of  Scripture  than  with  the  tradi- 
tions. In  this  respect  they  stood  nearer  to  Christ  than  the  Pharisees. 
The  Saviour  does  not  prescribe,  as  the  lawyer,  perhaps,  expected,  any 
new  and  special  command,  but  refers  him  to  the  law  itself,  which  he 
had  made  his  particular  study:  '^  What  is  written  in  the  law?  Hoic 
readest  thou  V  The  lawyer  quoted  in  reply  (as  did  the  scribe  refeiTed 
to  in  the  last  section)  the  all-embracing  commandment  to  love  God  and 
one's  neighbour.  "Do  this,"  said  Christ,  '■'and  thou  shalt  live;"  im- 
plying, what,  indeed,  is  the  doctrine  of  the  whole  New  Testament,  that 
if  a  man  were  really  capable  of  a  life  wholly  pervaded  by  this  love,  he 
would  lack  nothing  to  jtistify  him  before  God. 

The  lawyer  was  probably  ill-disposed  to  dwell  upon  the  requisites 
of  this  perfect  law  ;  and  Christ,  therefore,  sets  vividly  before  him  in  the 

*  This  parable,  like  that  mentioned  p.  216,  note,  i.s  peculiar  in  this,  that  the  truth  of  th« 
hi^'her  sphere  is  uot  illustrated  by  a  fact  from  the  lower,  but  the  general  truth,  by  a  spe- 
cial case  from  the  same  sphere,  which  may  in  itself  have  been  matter  of  fact. 

t  Cf  p.  315,  note,  and  p.  3r,8. 


364  CHRIST  AT  JERUSALEM. 

parable  the  nature  of  a  genuine  and  practical  love,  shown  in  the  Sa- 
maritan, in  contrast  with  that  obedience  to  the  law  which  goes  no  fur- 
ther than  the  lips,  illustrated  by  the  priest  and  the  Levite.  And  in 
conclusion,  he  told  him,  "  Go  thou  and  do  likewise,  and  thou  shalt  fulfil 
the  law."  The  contrast  between  true  and  pretended  love  is  thus  made 
prominent  in  the  parable  in  opposition  (1)  to  the  hypocrisy,  and  (2)  to 
the  narrow  exclusiveness  of  the  Pharisees.* 

§  251.  Christ's  Interpretation  of  Psalm  ex.,  1.  (Mark,  xii.,  35-37.) 
We  return  now  to  the  order  of  the  narrative.  We  are  informed  by 
the  Evangelists  that  in  the  course  of  these  controversies  with  his  oppo- 
nents Christ  put  to  them  the  question,  how  it  could  be  that  Messiah 
was  to  be  the  Son  of  David,  and  yet  that  David  called  him  "  Lord" 
(Ps.  ex.,  1).  We  are  not  precisely  told  with  what  view  he  proposed 
the  question ;  though  it  might,  perhaps,  be  inferred  from  Matthew's 
statement,  that  after  he  had  so  answered  their  captious  queries  as  to 
put  them  to  shame,  he  sought  in  turn  to  embarrass  them.  But  was  it 
consistent  with  the  dignity  of  his  character  to  put  questions  merely  for 
such  a  purpose  ?  Nothing  like  it,  at  all  events,  is  to  be  found  in  his 
words  or  actions.  Nor  can  we  well  imagine  that  the  shrewd  Pharisees 
could  have  been  much  embarrassed  by  such  an  interrogatory.  Their 
views  would  naturally  have  suggested  the  reply  that  Messiah  was  allu- 
ded to  in  respect  to  his  bodily  descent,  when  called  the  "  Son  of  Da- 
vid ;"  and  to  his  Divine  authority  as  Theocratic  King  when  called 
"  Lord."  In  this  case,  then,  as  in  a  recent  one,  we  follow  in  prefer- 
ence the  statement  of  Mark  ;  according  to  which,  Christ  put  the  ques- 
tion while  teaching  in  the  Temple,  perhaps  in  answer  to  something 
said  in  hostility  to  him.t 

But  for  what  purpose  of  instruction  did  he  quote  the  Psalm  1  Shut- 
ting out  every  thing  but  what  Mark  says,  we  should  have  to  suppose 
that  he  used  it  to  combat  the  opinion  that  Messiah  must  come  of  the 
line  of  David;  in  order,  perhaps,  to  make  good  his  claim  to  the  Mes- 
siahship  against  those  who  questioned  his  own  descent  from  David 
(.John,  vii.,  42).  But  Paul  could  not  have  presupposed  it  as  a  settled 
fact|  that  Christ  was  of  the  seed  of  David,  had  He  ever  expressed  him- 
self according  to  the  supposition  just  given.  Nor  would  his  argu- 
ment, in  this  case,  be  as  striking  as  we  commonly  see  in  his  disputes ; 
for,  as  we  have  said,  he  might  be  David's  Lord,  in  one  sense,  and  his 

*  It  has  been  supposed,  since  Christ's  reply  is  not  precisely  an  answer  to  tlie  question 
in  V.  29,  that  the  parable  may  have  been  separately  transmi,tteii,  and  at  a  later  period  put 
into  this  connexion,  a  connexion  imitated  from  Mark,  xii..  W,  seq.  ;  the  two  verses  of  this 
passage  (29-31)  being  transferred  in  Luke  from  Christ's  month  to  the  lawyer's.  But  even 
if  we  admit  that  the  connecting  link  in  the  dialogue  is  not  fully  given  in  Luke,  x.,  29,  the 
historical  order  is  so  obvious,  that  wc  arc  thrown  upon  no  such  forced  explanations. 

t  The  word  a-roKpiOcls  favours  this  conclusion.  J  Cf.  p.  17,  and  Heb.,  vii.,  14. 


PSALM  ex.,  1.  365 

Son  in  another.  Our  view,  then,  is  that  Christ  quoted  the  Psalm  in  or- 
der to  unfold  the  higher  idea  of  the  Messiah  as  the  Son  of  God,  and 
to  oppose,  not  the  idea  that  he  was  to  be  Son  of  David,  but  a  one-sided 
adherence  to  this,  at  the  expense  of  the  other  and  higher  one.  Per- 
haps offence  had  been  taken  at  the  higher  titles  which  he  assumed  to 
himself;  and  he  may  have  been  thereby  led  to  adopt  this  course  of  ar- 
gument. As  he  had  before  used  Ps.  Ixxxii.,  6,*  to  convince  the  Jews 
on  their  own  ground  that  it  was  no  blasphemy  for  him  to  claim  the  title 
"  Son  of  God"  in  the  highest  sense ;  so  now  he  used  Ps.  ex.  to  con- 
vince them  that  the  two  elements  were  blended  together  in  the  Mes- 
sianic idea.t  Still,  the  passage  may  only  have  preserved  to  us  the 
head  or  beginning  of  a  fuller  exposition. 

Even  though  it  be  proved  that  David  was  not  the  author  of  the 
Psalm  quoted,  Christ's  argument  is  not  invalidated  thereby.  Its  prin- 
cipal point  is  precisely  that  of  the  Psalm  ;  the  idea  of  the  Theocratic 
King,  King  and  Priest  at  once,  the  one  founded  upon  the  other,  raised 
up  to  God,  and  looking,  with  calm  assurance,  for  the  end  of  the  con- 
flict with  his  foes,  and  the  triumphant  establishment  of  his  kingdom. 
This  idea  could  never  be  realized  in  any  man  ;  it  was  a  prophecy  of 
Christ,  and  in  Him  it  was  fulfilled.  This  idea  went  forth  necessarily 
from  the  spirit  of  the  Old  Dispensation,  and  from  the  organic  connexion 
of  events  in  the  old  Theocracy ;  it  was  the  blossom  of  a  history  and  a 
religion  that  were,  in  their  very  essence,  prophetical.  In  this  regard  it 
is  matter  of  no  moment  whether  David  uttered  the  Psalm  or  not.  His- 
tory and  interpretation,  perhaps,  may  show  that  he  did  not.  But  whether 
it  was  a  conscious  prediction  of  the  royal  poet,  or  whether  some  other, 
in  poetic  but  holy  inspiration,  seized  upon  this  idea,  the  natural  blos- 
som and  off-shoot  of  Judaism,  and  assigned  it  to  an  earthly  monarch, 
although  in  its  true  sense  it  could  never  take  shape  and  form  in  such 
a  one — still  it  was  the  idea  by  which  the  Spirit,  of  which  the  inspired 
seer,  whoever  he  may  have  been,  was  but  the  organ,  pointed  to  Jesus. 
'I'he  only  difference  is  that  between  conscious  and  unconscious  proph- 
ecy. And  if  Christ  really  named  David  as  the  author  of  the  Psalm,  we 
are  not  reduced  to  the  alternative  of  detracting  from  his  infallibility  and 
imconditional  truthfulness,  or  else  of  admitting  that  David  really  wrote 
it.  The  question  of  the  authorship  was  immaterial  to  his  purpose ;  it 
was  no  part  of  his  Divine  calling  to  enter  into  such  investigations ;  his 

*  Cf.  p.  327. 

t  We  see  here  a  mark  of  tliat  higher  unity  in  which  the  lineaments  of  Christ's  picture, 
as  given  by  the  first  three  Gospels,  harmonize  with  those  given  by  John.  Although  at  a 
later  period  the  view  which  conceived  Christ,  as  to  his  caUing,  person,  and  authority, 
wholly  or  mainly  as  "  the  Sou  of  David,"  was  opposed  by  another  equally  one-sided  theory, 
which  recognized  him  only  as  "  Son  of  God,"  and  thrust  out  the  "Son  of  David"  entirely; 
it  would  be  a  most  arbiti-ary  procedure,  indeed,  to  infer  [as  some  have  done]  that  the  prev 
alence  of  the  latter  doctrine  alone  gave  rise  to  the  invention  of  this  passage. 


368  CHKIST  AT  JERUSALEM. 

teachings  and  his  revelation  lay  in  a  very  different  sphere.  Here  [as 
often  elsewhere]  he  doubtless  employed  the  ordinary  title  of  the  Psalm 
— the  one  to  which  his  hearers  were  accustomed. 

What  we  have  said  in  another  place*  in  regard  to  the  place  assigned 
by  Christ  to  the  Old  Testament  and  to  the  prophecies  is  enough,  we 
think,  to  show  that  he  regarded  it  as  a  revelation  not  fully  developed, 
hut  veiled  ;  not  brought  out  entirely  into  clear  consciousness,  but  con- 
taining also  a  circle  of  unconscious  prophecies.  Let  us  be  careful 
that  we  are  not  again  brought  into  bondage  to  a  Rabbinical  theology  of 
the  letter,  than  which  nothing  can  be  more  at  variance  with  the  spirit 
t>f  Christ. 

§  252.  The  Widoio's  Mite.  (Luke,  xxi.,  1-4;  Mark,  xii.,  41-44.) 
Christ  had  warned  the  disciples  against  the  mock-holiness  of  the 
Pharisees.  A  poor  widow  cast  two  mites,  all  her  wealth,  into  the 
treasury  of  the  Temple.  He  made  use  of  this  incident  to  impress 
them  again  with  the  truth,  so  often  and  so  variously  illustrated  by  him, 
that  it  is  the  heart  which  fixes  the  character  of  pious  actions  ;  that  the 
greatest  gifts  ai'e  valueless  without  pure  motives  ;  the  smallest,  worthy, 
with  them.  The  same  principle  was  set  forth  in  his  saying  that  gi'eat 
and  small  acts  were  alike  in  moral  worth,  if  done  in  his  name.] 

§  253.   Christ  ^^rcdicts  the  Divine  Judgments  ttpon  Jerusalem.     (Matt., 

xxiii.) 
Before  leaving  the  Temple,  Christ  delivered  a  discourse^  full  of 
severity  against  the  heads  of  the  hierarchy,  through  whom  destruction 
was  soon  to  be  brought  upon  the  nation.  He  then  announced  the 
judgments  of  God,  in  a  series  of  prophecies  that  were  afterward 
fulfilled  in  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  Regarding  himself  as  al- 
ready removed  from  the  earth,  he  says  nothing  further  of  what 
was  to  befall  his  own  person,  but  predicts  that  the  agents  by  whose 
labours  his  work  was  to  be  extended  would  be  persecuted,  like  the 
witnesses  for  the  truth  of  old ;  and  that  the  Jews,  thus  partaking  of 
the  wicked  spirit  of  their  fathers,  would  fill  up  the  measure  of  their 
sins,  and  bring  upon  themselves  the  wrath  which  the  accumulated  guilt 
of  ages  had  been  gathering.  Glancing  with  Divine  confidence  at  the 
developement  of  his  work,  he  says :  "  Behold  !  I  se?id  unto  youinojphcts, 
and  loise  men,  and  scribes  ;§  and  some  of  them  ye  shall  scotirge  in  your 

'  Cf.  p.  200.  t  Cf.  p.  288. 

t  This  discourse,  as  given  iu  Matt.,  xxiii.,  coutaius  mauy  passages  uttered  oii  other  occa- 
sions. 

6  The  application  of  these  Old  Testament  designations  to  Christ's  organs  is  not  strange  ; 
lie  intended  by  it  an  analogy  to  the  Theocratic  developement.  There  were  prophets  in  the 
early  Christian  Church;  and  the  term  "scribes"  is  applied,  in  Matt.,  xiii.,  r>2.  to  teachers 
in  the  "kingdom  of  heaven"  on  earth.    As  this  last  discourse,  as  given  by  Matthew,  con- 


THE  SECOND  ADVENT.  367 

synagogues,  and  j>crsccutc  them  from  city  to  city  ;  and  some  of  them  ye 
shall  kill  and  crucify.'"  He  concludes  with  a  mournful  allusion  to  the 
catastrophe  which  was  to  be  so  big  with  interest  to  the  kingdom  of 
God,  to  the  judgment  over  Jerusalem,  and  to  his  second  advent  to 
judge  the  earth  and  complete  his  work.  "  O  Jerusalem,  Jerusalem, 
thou  that  Jdllcst  the  proj)hcts,  and.  stonest  them  which  arc  sent  unto  thee, 
how  often  icoidd  I  have  gathered  thy  children  together,  even  as  a  hen 
gathcreth  her  chickens  under  her  wings,  and  ye  would  not*  Behold  ! 
your  house  is  left  unto  you  desolate  ;\  for  I  say  unto  you,  that  ye  shall 
not  see  me  henceforth,  till  ye  shall  say,  Blessed  is  he  that  cometh  in  the 
name  of  the  LiordP  He  obviously,  in  this  last  clause,  betokens  his 
second  and  triumphal  advent  as  Theocratic  King.  Other  persons, 
however,  are  implied  than  those  to  whom  the  discourse  was  directed  : 
they  were  least  likely  ever  to  welcome  him  with  praises,  and  the  words 
denote  a  willing,  not  a  forced  submission.  We  take  them  as  referring 
to  the  Jews  in  general,  as  the  previous  verse  refers  to  the  inhabitants 
of  Jerusalem  in  general ;  the  particular  generation  intended  being  left 
undefined. 

§  254.  Christ's  Prediction  of  the  Coming  of  the  Kingdo7n  of  God,  and 
of  his  Second  Advent.  (Mark,  xiii. ;  Matt.,  xxiv.) 
Christ  had  left  the  Temple  with  the  disciples.  They  were  admi- 
ring the  external  splendour  of  the  edifice,  and  he,  still  full  of  prophecy, 
took  advantage  of  it  to  tell  them  that  all  this  magnificence  should  be 
swept  away  in  the  general  ruin  of  the  city.  These  intimations  kindled 
an  anxious  curiosity  in  their  minds,  and  when  they  were  alone  with 
him,  upon  the  Mount  of  Olives,  they  questioned  him  closely  as  to  the 
signs  by  which  the  approaching  catastrophe  could  be  known,  and  the 
time  when  it  should  take  place. 

tains  various  passages  given  by  Luke  in  tlie  table-conversation  (oh.  xi.),  so  Luke  inserts 
there  this  prophetic  aunounceinent,  whose  proper  position  is  found  in  Matthew.  In  oppo- 
sition to  Dr.  Schiieckenhurger  (Stud.  d.  Evang.  Geistl.  Wiirtemb.,  vi.,  1,  p.  35),  I  must 
think  that  the  form  of  Christ's  words  given  by  Luke  is  the  less  original.  It  shows  the 
ti'aces  of  Christian  language.  In  Luke,  xi.,  49.  this  prophecy  is  introduced  as  coming  from 
"  the  wisdom  of  God"  (cf  Wisdom  of  Solomon,  vii.,  27).  The  origin  of  this  form  of  citation 
is  accounted  for  very  naturally  by  my  dear  colleague  and  friend,  Dr.  Ticesten,  on  the  ground 
that  so  notable  a  prediction  could  readilj-  be  transmitted  as  a  separate  one ;  that  it  was  so 
transmitted  as  an  utterance  of  the  Divine  wisdom  manifested  in  Christ ;  and  that  Luke, 
receiving  it  in  this  form,  so  incorporated  it  in  his  collection. 

*  We  have  already  remai'ked  tliat  these  words  necessarily  presuppose  previous  and  re- 
peated labours  of  Christ  at  Jerusalem.     Cf  p.  157,  324,  note. 

t  He  withdraws  from  them  his  blessing,  saving  presence,  and  "  leaves"  them,  since  they 
viill  not  be  saved,  to  the  desolation  and  destruction  they  have  brought  upon  themselves. 
By  the  word  "house"  we  need  not  necessarily  understand  "  temple"  (cf  Dc  Wette,  in  loc.) ; 
but  it  is  yet  a  question  whether  Clirist  did  not  really  mean  the  Temple,  which  he  was  just 
leaving.  If  so,  he  calls  it  "their"  house,  not  the  house  of  God,  because  their  depravity 
lind  desecrated  the  holy  place.  His  leaving  it  was  a  sign  that  God's  presence  should 
dwell  in  it  no  more. 


368  CHRIST  AT  JERUSALEM. 

It  was  certainly  far  from  Christ's  intention  to  give  them  a  complete 
view  of  the  course  of  developement  of  the  kingdom  of  God  up  to  its 
final  consummation.     He  imparted  only  so  much  as  was  necessary  to 
guard  them  against  deception,  to  stimulate  their  watchfulness,  and  con- 
firm their  confidence  that  the  end  would  come  at  last.     Much,  indeed, 
was  at  that  time  beyond  their  comprehension,  and  could  only  be  made 
clear  by  the  enlightening  influence  of  the  Spirit,  and  by  the  progi'ess 
of  events.     Indeed,  if  they  had  fully  understood  the  intimations  he 
had  previously  given,  they  might  have  spared  themselves  many  ques- 
tions.    It  was  always  Christ's  method  to  cast  into  their  minds  the  seeds 
of  truth,  that  were  only  to  spring  up  into  full  consciousness  at  a  later 
period.     This  was  especially  the  case  in  his  prophecies  of  the  future 
progress  and  prospects  of  the  kingdom  of  God.     A  clear  and  con- 
nected knowledge  on  that  point  was  not  essential  to  the  preachers  of 
his  Gospel.     Many  predictions  had  necessarily  to  remain  obscure  until 
the  time  of  their  fulfilment.     He  himself  says  (Matt.,  xxiv.,  3G  ;  Mark, 
xiii.,  32)  that  the  day  and  hour  of  the  final  decision  are  known  only  to 
the  counsels  of  the  Father ;   and,  as  it  would  be  trifling  to  refer  this  to 
the  precise  "  day  and  hour,"  rather  than  to  the  time  in  general,  it  could 
not  have  been  his  purpose  to  give  definite  information  on  the  subject. 
To  know  the  ti7ne,  presupposed  a  knowledge  of  the  hidden  causes  of 
events,  of  the  actions  and  reactions  of  free  beings — a  prescience  which 
none  but  the  Father  could  have ;  unless  we  suppose,  what  Christ  ex- 
pressly denies,  that  He  had  received  it  by  a  special  Divine  revelation. 
Not  that  he  could  err,  but  that  his  knowledge  was  conscious  of  its  lim- 
its ;  although  he  knew  the  progress  of  events,  and  saw  the  slow  course 
of  their  developement,*  as  no  mortal  could. 

When,  therefore,  Christ  speaks  in  this  discourse  of  the  great  import 
of  his  coming  for  the  history  of  the  world,  of  his  triumphant  self-mani- 
festation, and  of  the  beginning  of  his  kingdom,  he  betokens  thereby 
partly  his  triumph  in  the  destruction  of  the  visible  Theocracy,  and  its 
results  in  the  freer  and  wider  diff"usion  of  his  kingdom,  and  partly  his 
second  advent  for  its  consummation.  The  judgment  over  the  degener- 
ate Theocracy,  and  the  final  judgment  of  the  world  ;  the  first  free  devel- 
opement of  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  its  final  and  glorious  consumma- 
tion, correspond  to  each  other :  the  former,  in  each  case,  prefiguring 
the  latter.  And  so,  in  general,  all  great  epochs  of  the  world's  history, 
in  which  God  reveals  himself  as  Judge,  condemning  a  creation  ripe 
for  destruction,  and  calling  a  new  one  into  being ;  all  critical  and  cre- 
ative epochs  of  the  world's  history  correspond  to  each  other,  and  col- 
lectively prefigure  the  last  judgment  and  the  last  creation — the  con- 
summation of  the  kingdom  of  God. 

If  Christ  had  been  but  a  projihcf,  we  might  indeed  suppose  that  the 

*  Cf.  p.  80,  on  the  Plan  of  Jesus,  and  189,  seq.,  on  the  Parables  of  the  Kingdom  of  God. 


THE  MARRIAGE  FEAST.  369 

image  of  the  glorious  future  which  unveiled  itself  to  his  seeing,  glance 
in  moments  of  inspiration,  was  involuntarily  blended  in  his  mind  with 
the  realities  of  the  present ;  and  that  events,  separated  by  long  inter- 
vals of  time,  presented  themselves  as  closely  joined  together.  But  we 
must  here  distinguish  between  the  conscious  truth  and  the  defective 
forms  in  which  it  was  apprehended  ;  between  the  revelation  of  the 
Divine  Spirit  in  itself,  and  the  hues  which  it  took  from  the  narrowness 
of  human  apprehension,  and  the  forms  of  the  time  in  which  it  was  de- 
livered. In  Christ,  however,  we  can  recognize  no  blending  of  truth 
with  error,  no  alloy  of  the  truth  as  it  appeared  to  his  own  mind.*  What 
we  have  already  said  is  enough  to  show  that  this  could  not  ^coexist 
with  the  expositions  given  by  him  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  But  it  is 
easy  to  explain  how  points  of  time  which  He  kept  apart,  although  he 
presented  them  as  countei^parts  of  each  other,  without  assigning  any 
express  duration  to  either,  were  blended  together  in  the  apprehension 
of  his  hearers,  or  in  their  subsequent  repetitions  of  his  language.t 

§  255.  Parahl§  of  the  Marriage  Feast  of  the  King's  Son.     (Matt.,  xxii., 

1-14.) 
Matthew  assigns  to  this  period  several  parables  in  which  Christ 
illustrated  the  course  of  developement  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  Some 
of  them  are  allied  to  those  mentioned  by  us  before  in  following  Luke's 
account.  But  their  affinity  does  not  justify  us  in  concluding,  with  some 
modern  writers,  that  they  were  originally  one  and  the  same,  and  that 
the  variations  in  their  form  are  due  to  their  more  or  less  faithful  trans- 
mission. We  hope  to  be  able  to  show,  as  we  have  done  in  other  cases, 
that  the  allied  parables  are  alike  original,  and  were  alike  uttered  by 
Christ  himself. 

*  Cf.  p.  80. 

t  It  was  peculiar,  as  we  liave  seen,  to  the  editor  of  our  Greek  Matthew  to  arrange  to- 
gether congenial  sayings  of  Christ,  though  uttered  at  different  times  and  in  different  rela- 
tions ;  and  we  have  remarked  this  (p.  318,  note  t)  in  reference  to  the  discourse  in  Matt., 
xxiv.  We  need  not,  therefore,  wonder  if  wo  find  it  impossible  to  draw  the  lines  of  dis- 
tinction in  this  discourse  with  entire  accnrac}';  nor  need  such  a  result  lead  us  to  forced  in- 
terpretations, inconsistent  with  truth  and  with  the  love  of  truth.  It  is  much  easier  to  make 
such  distinctions  in  Luke's  account  (ch.  xxi.),  though  even  that  is  not  without  its  difficul- 
ties. In  comparing  Matthew  and  Luke  together,  however,  we  can  trace  the  origin  of  most 
of  these  difficulties  to  the  blending  of  difftrcnt  portions  together,  when  the  discourses  of 
Christ  were  arranged  in  collections.  It  is  true,  Strauss  and  De  Wette  assert  that  the  forai 
of  the  discourses  in  Matthew  is  much  more  original  than  in  Luke  ;  that  the  latter  bears 
marks  of  a  date  subsequent  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem;  and,  therefore,  that  it  was 
remodelled  after  the  event  had  given  its  light  to  the  prediction,  and  shown  the  falsity  of 
some  of  the  expectations  entertained  by  the  disciples.  But  does  the  character  of  the  dis- 
course confirm  this  hj'pothesis  ?  Would  the  narrator,  in  such  a  case,  have  left  such  passages 
unaltered  as  xxi.,  10,  also  18,  compared  with  16  and  28?  It  is  impossible  to  carry  the  hy- 
pothesis through  consistently  with  itself;  and  the  natural  conclusion  is,  that  Luke  has,  as 
UBual,  given  us  Christ's  discourses  in  the  most  faithful  and  original  way. 

Aa 


370  CHRIST  AT  JERUSALEM. 

We  take  up  first  the  parable  of  the  Marriage  of  the  King's  Son 
(Matt.,  xxii).  The  kingdom  of  God  is  here  represented  under  the 
figure  of  a  marriage  feast  given  by  the  King  (God)  to  his  Son  (Christ), 
The  o-uests  invited  are  the  members  of  the  old  Theocratic  nation. 
When  the  banquet  is  prepared  (/.  c.  when  the  kingdom  of  God  is  to 
be  established  upon  earth),  the  king  sends  his  servants  out  at  different 
times  to  call  in  the  guests  that  were  before  bidden.  Some  follow  their 
business  without  the  least  regard  to  the  invitation;  corresponding  to 
those  men  who  are  wholly  devoted  to  earthly  things,  and  indifferent  to 
the  Divine.  Others,  going  still  further,  seize,  abuse,  and  finally  kill  the 
servant*;  representing  men  decidedly  hostile  to  the  Gospel,  and  per- 
secutors of  its  preachers.  It  is  not  strange  that  Christ  does  not  in  this, 
as  in  another  parable,  add  another  point  of  gradation,  by  sending  out 
the  son  to  be  maltreated  also  ;  it  would  not  harmonize  with  the  plan 
of  the  parable  for  the  king's  son,  in  whose  honour  the  feast  was  given, 
to  go  about  like  a  servant  and  invite  his  guests.  Moreover,  the  para- 
ble refers  to  Christ's  agents,  not  to  himself;  as  he  speaks  of  a  time 
when  he  shall  no  more  be  present  on  the  earth.  ' 

When  the  king  learns  what  has  passed,  he  sends  his  armies,  seizes 
the  murderers,  and  burns  their  city ;  corresponding  to  the  prophecy  of 
the  judgment  over  the  Jews  and  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  As  the 
city  is  destroyed,  new  guests  cannot  be  invited  from  thence;  the  king 
sends  his  servants  out  into  the  highways,  frequented  by  many  travel- 
lers, with  orders  to  invite  eveiy  body  to  the  wedding;  a  prophetic  in- 
timation, obviously,  that,  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  of  the 
old  Theocratic  nation,  the  doors  of  the  kingdom  would  be  thrown  wide 
open,  and  all  the  heathen  nations  be  invited  to  come  in.  The  servants, 
in  execution  of  the  command,  bring  in  all  whom  they  meet,  both  good 
and  bad. 

A  second  prominent  feature  of  the  parable  now  appears ;  the  sifting 
of  the  o-uests.  Those  who  have  a  just  sense  of  the  honour  done  them 
by  the  invitation,  and  come  in  a  wedding-garment,  represent  such  as 
fit  themselves  for  membership  of  the  kingdom  of  God  by  proper  dis- 
positions of  heart ;  while  those  who  come  in  the  garb  in  which  the  in- 
vitation happens  to  find  them  correspond  to  such  as  accept  the  calls  of 
the  Gospel  without  any  change  of  heart.  Chnst  himself  gives  promi- 
nence to  this  feature  of  the  parable  in  the  words,  "Many  are  called, 
hut  few  are  chosen;"  distinguishing  the  gi'eat  mass  of  outward  pro- 
fessors who  obey  the  extenial  call  from  the  few  who  are  "chosen," 
because  their  hearts  are  right.* 

*  Many  interpreters  think  the  case  shonld  be  conceived  thus  :  The  caftan,  or  wedding- 
dress,  was  offered  to  the  guests,  according  to  Oriental  custom,  by  the  king  himself,  and 
their  disrespect  was  shown  in  refusing  to  accept  it  at  his  hands  ;  thus  representing  justifi- 
cation by  faith  as  the  offered  gift  of  Divine  grace.  This  conception  would  help  us  to  ex- 
plain Low  the  guests  taken  upon  the  road  might  have  secured  the  wedding-garment,  had 


THE  WICKED  VINE-DRESSERS.  371 

This  parable  is  certainly  similar  to  that  in  Luke,  xiv.,  16-24,  before 
treated  of;*  but  the  new  and  dificrent  features  which  it  presents  indi- 
cate that  it  was  uttered  at  a  different  period.  In  Luke's  parable  the 
hostility  of  the  invited  guests  is  not  so  decided  ;  they  offer  excuses  for 
not  coming.  The  contrast,  in  fact,  is  limited  to  the  Jewish  nation  ;  the 
poor  and  despised  Jewish  peojilc  being  opposed  to  the  Pharisees.  And 
as  no  general  Jewish  enmity  is  alluded  to,  so  the  destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem is  not  mentioned  at  all,  and  the  calling  of  the  heathen  only  by 
the  way. 

§  2oQ>.  Parable  of  the  Wicked  Husbandman.  (Matt.,  xxi.,  .'J3-44  ; 
Mark,  xii.,  1-12  ;  Luke,  xx.,  9-18.) 
The  gradations  of  guilt  in  the  conduct  of  the  Jews  towards  the  Di- 
vine messengers,  and,  finally,  towards  the  Son  himself,  are  set  forth  mon? 
prominently  in  the  parable  of  the  vineyard  and  the  wicked  vine-dressers 
(Matt.,  xxi.,  33).  The  enjoyment  of  the  kingdom  of  God  is  the  point 
contemplated  in  the  parable  of  the  marriage  of  the  king's  son  ;  the  hi- 
hour  done  for  it  is  that  of  the  parable  now  before  us.  The  former  rej)- 
resents  the  kingdom  in  its  consummation  in  the  fellowship  of  the  re- 
deemed; the  latter,  in  its  gradual  developement  on  earth,  demanding 
the  activity  of  men  for  its  advancement.  The  lord  of  the  vineyard  had 
done  every  thing  necessary  for  its  cultivation  ;  so  had  God  ordained  all 
things  wisely  for  the  prosperity  of  his  kingdom  among  the  Jews ;  all 
that  was  wanting  was  that  they  should  rightly  use  the  means  instituted 
by  him.  The  lord  of  the  vineyard  had  a  right  to  demand  of  his  ten- 
ants a  due  proportion  of  fruit  at  the  vintage  ;  so  God  required  of  the 
Jews  to  whom  he  had  intrusted  the  Theocracy  to  be  cultivated,  the 
fruits  of  a  corresponding  life.  When  the  earlier  messengers  sent  to 
call  them  to  repentance  had  been  evilly  entreated  and  slain,  he  sends 
his  Son,  the  destined  heir  of  the  vineyard,  the  King  of  the  Theocracy. 
But  as  they  show  like  dishonour  to  him,  and  kill  him  to  secure  them- 
selves entire  independence — to  turn  the  kingdom  of  God  into  anarchy 
— his  judgments  break  forth;  the  Theocratic  relation  is  broken,  and 

they  chosen  to  do  so ;  nor  is  it  a  sufficient  objection  to  it  to  say  that  such  a  usage  cannot 
be  proved  to  have  prevailed  in  ancient  times  ;  for  the  similarity  of  modern  to  ancient  cus- 
toms in  the  East  is  so  great,  that  we  can  infer  from  such  as  exist  now,  or  at  late  periods, 
tliat  like  ones  prevailed  in  the  earliest  ages.  But  if  a  thought  so  important  to  the  whole 
parable  had  been  intended,  Christ  would  not  have  failed  to  express  it  definitely  ;  he  would 
have  expressly  reprimanded  the  delinquent  guests  with,  "  The  garment  was  offered  as  a  gift, 
and  ye  would  not  accept  it;  so  much  the  greater  your  guilt."  In  short,  if  this  conception 
be  the  right  one,  we  must  infer  either  that  the  parable  has  not  been  faithfully  transmitted, 
or  that  the  usage  referred  to  was  so  general  in  the  East  that  no  particular  reference  to  it 
was  necessary.  At  all  events,  the  mode  by  which  the  wedding-dress  could  be  obtained 
was  not  important  to  Christ's  purpose  ;  and  the  absence  of  any  allusion  to  it  does  not  justify 
Strauss's  conclusion  that  there  is  a  foreign  trait  in  the  parable,  or  that  it  is  composed  of 
several  heterogeneous  parts.  *  Of.  p.  254. 


372  CHRIST  AT  JERUSALEM. 

the  kingdom  is  transferred  to  other  nations  that  shall  bring  forth  fruits 
corresponding  to  it.* 

§  257.  Parable  of  the  Talents  (Matt.,  xxv.,  14-30)  compared  loWi  that 
of  the  Pounds  (Luke,  xix.,  12). 
The  parable  of  the  talents  (Matt.,  xxv.)  is  evidently  allied  to  that  of 
the  pounds]  (Luke,  xix.,  12) ;  but  there  are  points  of  difference  too 
striking  to  be  ascribed  to  alterations  in  transmission.  In  the  latter, 
each  of  the  servants  receives  the  same  sura,  one  pound,  and  their  posi- 
tion in  the  kingdom  is  assigned  according  to  their  gains.  In  the  for- 
mer, different  sums  are  intrusted  to  the  servants  in  proportion  to  their 
ability,  and  those  who  bring  gains  in  the  same  proportion  are  rewarded 
accordingly.  The  aim,  therefore,  of  Luke's  parable  is  to  represent 
different  degrees  of  zeal  in  the  management  of  one  and  the  same  thing, 
granted  to  all  alike  ;  of  Matthew's,  to  show  that  one's  acceptance  does 
not  depend  upon  his  powers,  or  the  extent  of  his  sphere  of  labour,  but 
upon  faithfulness  of  heart,  which  is  independent  of  both.  If  the  dif- 
ferent number  of  talents  in  the  latter  parable  represents  different 
spheres  of  labour,  greater  or  less,  corresponding  to  different  measures 
of  power,  then  the  one  pound  in  the  former  must  represent  the  one  com- 
mon endowment  of  Christians — the  one  Divine  life  or  the  one  Divine 
truth  received  into  the  life  in  all  believers — the  one  Divine  power,  prov- 
ing itself  by  its  fruits  in  all  who  partake  of  it — but  yet  admitting  of 
different  degi-ees  of  fruitfulness  according  to  the  completeness  with 
which  it  is  willingly  received  and  appropriated.  These  points  of  dif- 
ference in  the  two  parables  presuppose  that  they  had  different  objects. 
That  of  the  talents  aimed  to  intimate  that  the  reward  depends  upon  the 
motives,  not  upon  the  amount  of  one's  labours,  except  so  far  as  this 
might  be  affected  by  the  disposition  of  the  heai't ;  and  perhaps,  also, 
to  rebuke  ambition  and  jealousy  among  the  disciples  themselves.  That 
of  the^^oMwJ,  on  the  other  hand,  was  designed  to  stimulate  the  zeal  of 
the  Apostles  in  their  labours  for  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  encourage 
them  to  a  holy  emulation. 

In  both  parables  the  servant  who  makes  no  use  of  the  capital  in- 
trusted to  him  is  condemned.  But  in  Matthew  this  servant  is  precisely 
the  one  to  whom  only  one  talent  is  given  ;  representing,  perhaps,  those 
who,  with  inferior  powers,  have  insufficient  confidence,  and  make  the 
smallness  of  their  gifts  and  the  narrowness  of  their  sphere  of  labour  a 
plea  for  inactivity ;  such  as  say,  comparing  their  talents  and  opportu- 
nities with  those  of  others,  "  What  can  be  expected  of  me,  to  whom  so 
little  has  been  given  V     Here  again,  then,  faithfulness  and  zeal,  not  the 

*■  It  is  to  be  observed  that  the  judgment  of  the  .Jewish  nation  is  here  represented  as  a 
"coming  of  the  Lord ;"  intimating  that  we  are  to  see  in  that  judgment  a  "coming"  of  his 
in  a  spiritual  sense.  t  Cf.  p.  348. 


FAITH  AND  WORKS.  373 

measure  of  gifts,  are  made  prominent.  In  the  parable  oi' the  pomids,  the 
one  pound  is  taken  away  from  the  negligent  servant  and  given  to«liim 
that  gained  most ;  in  harmony  with  the  scope  of  the  parable,  that  which 
the  negligent  one  never  truly  possessed  (because  he  never  used  it)  is 
transferred  to  him  who  proved  himself  worthy  of  the  trust  by  gaining 
most.  It  is  not  so  in  the  parable  of  the  talents  ;  here  equality  in  mo- 
tive and  disposition  is  the  main  point,  so  that  the  quantitatice  differen- 
ces disappear,  and  he  who  with  five  talents  gains  other  five  deserves 
no  pre-eminence  on  that  account.  The  feature,  therefore,  given  in  Matt., 
XXV.,  28,  is  not  so  appropriate  to  his  parable  as  to  Luke's  ;  at  all  events, 
it  belongs  only  to  the  filling  up  of  the  picture  in  the  former,  while  in 
the  latter  it  is  a  prominent  feature. 

§  258.  Parable  of  the  Wise  and  Foolish  Virgins.  (Matt.,  xxv.,  1-13.) 
The  parable  of  the  virgins  was  designed  to  set  vividly  before  the  dis- 
ciples the  necessity  of  constant  preparation  for  the  uncertain  time  of 
Christ's  second  advent,  without  at  all  clearing  up  the  uncertainty  of  the 
time  itself;  thus  harmonizing  exactly  with  all  his  teachings  on  the  sub- 
ject. It  is  certainly,  also,  the  representation  (so  often  made  by  Christ) 
of  the  idea  of  Christian  virtue  under  the  form  of  prudence ;  and  illus- 
trates the  connexion  between  Christian  prudence  and  that  ever-vigilant 
presence  of  mind  which  springs  from  one  constant  and  predominant  aim 
of  life.  But  we  must  distinguish  between  the  fundamental  thought  of 
the  parable  and  its  supplementary  features.  It  may  be  that  one  of  these 
latter  is  the  fruitless  application  of  the  foolish  virgins  to  the  wise  for  a 
supply  which  they  might  have  secured  for  themselves  by  adequate  care 
and  forethought ;  yet,  perhaps,  Christ,  piercing  the  recesses  of  the  hu- 
man heart,  and  seeing  its  tendency  to  trust  in  the  vicarious  services 
and  merits  of  others,  may  have  intended,  by  this  feature  of  the  para- 
ble, to  warn  his  disciples  against  such  a  fatal  error. 

§  259.   Christ  teaches  that  Faith  must  j^i'ove  itself  hy  Works.     (Matt., 

XXV.,  31-46.) 
At  the  close  of  the  twenty-fifth  chapter  of  Matthew  there  is  given  a 
representation  of  the  final  judgment.  There  has  been,  and  may  be, 
much  debate  as  to  both  the  form  and  the  substance  of  this  representa- 
tion. In  regard  to  the  latter  it  .may  be  asked,  "  What  judgment  is 
alluded  to,  and  who  are  to  be  judged  *?"  One  reply  is,  that  the  judg- 
ment of  unbelievers  alone  is  meant  ;*  because,  according  to  Christ's 
own  words  (.Tohn,  iii.,  18),  believers  are  freed  from  judgment;  and 
because  the  objects  of  the  judgment  are  designated  by  the  term  IOvt]^ 
D'li,  a  term  applied  exclusively  to  that  portion  of  mankind  which  does 
not  belong  to  the  kingdom  of  God. 

*  Advocated  particularly  by  Kcil  (Opuscula)  and  Ohhausen  (Commentar.). 


374  CHRIST  AT  JERUSALEM. 

It  is  true,  the  Scriptures  teach  (Rom.,  ii.,  12,  seq.)  that  even  among 
these  nations  there  are  degrees  of  moral  character  which  will  certainly 
he  recognized  by  the  just  judge  ;  but  the  distinctions  drawn  by  tho 
judge  in  the  passage  before  us  are  not  of  this  character.  Further,  the 
theory  alluded  to  will  not  explain  why  sympathy  and  assistance  ren- 
dered to  believers  are  made  the  sole  standard,  and  all  other  moral  tests 
thrown  out.  All  that  it  can  offer  is  one  or  the  other  of  the  following 
.^suppositions  :  either  that  this  sympathy  is  a  general  love  for  mankind, 
and  its  manifestation  to  proclaimers  of  the  Gospel  merely  an  accidental 
feature ;  or  that  it  springs  from  a  direct  interest  in  the  cause  of  ChritJt 
and  the  Gospel  itself.  But  the  first  supposition  would  make  the  asciip- 
tion  of  special  value  to  these  acts  inconsistent  with  the  standard  set  up 
by  Christ  himself;  for  the  acts  are  (according  to  the  hypothesis)  out- 
ward and  accidental.  The  second  does,  indeed,  afford  a  ground  for 
preference  in  the  motive,  viz.,  love  of  Christ's  cause  ;  but,  then,  it  does 
away  the  theory  itself,  for  the  developement  of  such  a  sentiment  in  the 
minds  of  ihose  who  entertain  it  would  inevitably  make  them  Christians. 

This  theory,  therefore,  is  untenable  on  either  side.  It  is  further  re- 
futed by  the  fact  that,  in  the  passage,  Christ  bestows  upon  those  to 
whom  he  awards  his  praise  the  very  titles  which  belong  exclusively  to 
believers:  as  the  ^'•righteous;''''  the  ^^  blessed  of  the  Father,  for  whom 
the  hingdom  loas  prepared  from  the  foundation  of  the  worlds  We  con- 
clude, thei'efore,  that  the  judgment  will  include  the  trial  and  sifting  of 
professors  of  the  faith  themselves.  As  before  that  final  decision  the 
faith  of  the  Gospel  will  have  been  spread  among  all  nations,  so  all  na- 
tions are  represented  as  brought  to  the  bar  ;  but,  among  these,  genuine 
believers  will  be  separated  from  those  whose  fidelity  has  not  been 
proved  by  their  lives.  Indeed,  we  have  already  treated  of  several 
parables  which  presuppose  such  a  final  sifting  of  believers ;  nor  is  it  at 
all  inconsistent  with  the  conscious  assurance  of  the  faithful  that  they 
are  free  from  judgment  through  the  redemption  of  Christ. 

It  is  every  where  taught  by  him  that  brotherly  love  is  a  peculiar  fruit 
of  faith,  the  very  test  of  its  genuineness  ;  and  we  cannot  wonder,  there- 
fore, to  find  it  made  so  prominent  in  tliis  passage.  The  pious  are 
represented  in  it  as  following  the  Impulses  of  a  true  brotherly  love, 
founded  upon  love  to  Christ,  and  as  manifesting  this  love  in  kind  acts 
to  their  brethren  without  respect  to  persons.  Yet  they  attach  no  merit 
to  their  works,  and  are  amazed  to  find  the  Lord  value  them  so  highly 
as  to  consider  them  done  unto  himself.  But  those  whose  faith  is  life- 
less and  loveless,  and  who  rely  upon  their  outward  confessions  of  the 
Lord  for  their  acceptance,  are  amazed,  on  the  other  hand,  at  their  re- 
jection. Never  conscious  of  the  intimate  connexion  between  faith  and 
love,  or  of  genuine  Christian  feelings  referring  every  thing  to  Chri.st, 
and  seeing  him  in  all  things,  they  cannot  understand  why  he  interprnfa 


THE  HEATHENS  WITH  CHRIST.  375 

their  lack  of  love  for  the  brethren  into  lack  of  love  for  himself.  The 
mere  fact  that  faith  is  not  expressly  mentioned  in  connexion  with  the 
judgment  does  not  affect  our  view ;  it  is  taken  for  granted  that  all  have 
already  professed  the  faith,  and  the  genuine  believers  are  to  be  sepa- 
rated from  the  spurious. 

On  the  whole,  then,  we  are  not  to  look  upon  this  representation  as  a 
picture  of  the  final  judgment.  Its  aim  is  to  set  forth,  most  vividly  and 
impressively,  the  great  and  fundamental  truth,  that  no  faith  but  that 
which  proves  itself  by.  works  can  secure  a  title  to  the  kingdom  of 
Heaven.  We  cannot  fail  to  see  in  the  "  throne,"  the  "  right  hand,"  the 
*■  left  hand,"  &c.,  a  figurative  drapery,  attending  and  setting  off  the  one 
fundamental  thought.  Moreover,  it  was  not  Christ's  usage  to  speak 
of  himself  directly  under  the  title  of  "  King."  The  form  of  the  descrip- 
tion, then,  we  suppose  to  have  been  parabolical ;  and  its  character  in 
this  respect  was  probably  still  more  obvious  when  Christ  delivered  it. 

§  260.  The  Heathens  with  Christ.  (John,  xii.,  20,  seq.) 
Among  the  hosts  of  visiters  at  the  feast  there  were  not  a  few  heathens 
who  had  come  to  the  knowledge  of  Jehovah  as  the  true  God,  and 
were  accustomed  to  worship  statedly  at  Jerusalem  ;  perhaps  prose- 
lytes of  the  gate.*  Christ's  triumphal  entryt  and  ministry  attracted 
their  attention,  and  all  that  they  heard  found  a  point  of  contact  in  their 
awakened  religious  longings.  Not  venturing  to  address  him  person- 
ally, they  sought  the  mediation  of  one  of  his  disciples.|  Seeing  in 
these  individual  cases  a  prefiguring  of  the  great  results,  in  the  moral 
regeneration  of  mankind  and  the  diffusion  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  that 

*  This  may  be  inferred  from  the  use  of  avadaiv&vTtxiv  (v.  20). 

t  There  appears  to  be  a  discrepancy  between  John  and  the  other  Evangelists,  if  the 
facts  related  by  liim  in  xii.,  20,  seq.,  took  place  after  Christ's  entry,  on  the  same  day,  and 
if  Christ  retired  from  the  public  immediately  after  his  last  warnintr  to  the  Jews.  On  this 
supposition  time  could  not  have  been  afforded  for  the  transactions  we  have  already  intro- 
duced in  this  interval  from  the  synoptical  Gospels.  But  it  is  evident  from  John's  own  nar- 
rative that  Christ  found  many  followers  just  after  his  entry,  and  that  this  led  even  his 
enemies  to  be  cautious.  It  may  be  inferred,  therefore,  that  Khrist  made  use  of  the  great 
impression  produced  by  his  appearance,  and  did  not  immediately  withdraw  himself  The 
chasm  in  John  is  well  filled  by  the  other  Gospels,  and  with  matter  precisely  suited  to  the 
time.  John's  main  object  was  to  give  (as  he  alone  could)  the  last  discourses  of  Jesus  with 
his  disciples ;  and  for  this  reason,  probably,  he  omitted  several  features  of  Christ's  public 
labours.  Two  hypotheses  are  possible:  {1}  Christ's  conversation  with  the  Greeks  took 
place  several  days  after  hia  entry,  and  just  before  the  end  of  his  public  labours ;  thereby 
leaving  ample  space  for  the  transactions  recorded  in  tlie  sj'noptical  Gospels  ;  (2)  or  it  took 
place  on  the  dai/  of  his  entry,  and  was  occasioned  by  the  sensation  produced  by  that  event; 
leaving  a  few  days  before  his  retirement,  in  which  interval  the  events  recorded  in  the 
synoptical  Gospels  occurred.  These  John  did  not  mention ;  but,  after  giving  a  brief  sam- 
mary  of  Christ's  final  warning  to  the  Jews,  hastened  on  to  his  last  discourses  with  the 
disciples. 

X  Philip  does  not  take  at  once  the  bold  step  of  presenting  the  heathen  to  Christ :  he  tells 
Andrew,  and  then  both  together  tell  Jesus.    Thus  naturally  does  John  relate  it. 


376  CHRIST  AT  JERUSALEM. 

were  to  flow  from  liis  own  sufferings,  he  said,  "  TJic  Jiour  is  covie  that 
the  Son  of  Man  should  be  gloi-ificd."  (The  man  Jesus,  exalted  to 
glory  in  heaven  by  his  sufterings ;  the  glorified  one,  who  was  to  reveal 
himself  in  his  influences  upon  mankind ;  especially  in  the  invisible 
workings  of  his  Divine  power  for  the  spread  of  the  Divine  kingdom.) 
The  necessity  of  his  death  is  next  set  forth.  The  seed-corn,"  abideth 
alone"  unless  it  is  thrown  into  the  earth;  but  when  it  dies,  it  brings 
forth  fruit :  so  the  Divine  life,  so  long  as  Jesus  remained  upon  earth 
in  personal  form,  was  confined  to  himself;  but  when  the  earthly  shell 
was  cast  off,  the  way  was  open  for  the  diffusion  of  the  Divine  life 
among  all  mankind.  As  yet  the  disciples  themselves  were  wholly  de- 
pendent upon  his  personal  appearance  ;  and,  therefore,  he  said  that  He 
alone,  as  the  Son  of  Man,  was  yet  in  possession  of  this  Divine  life.  And 
as  He  was  to  be  glorified  through  sufferings,  so  he  told  his  disciples 
that  the  happiness  and  glory  destined  for  them  was  to  be  secured  only 
by  self-denial.  '■'He  that  loveth  his  life  (makes  the  earthly  life  his 
chief  good)  shall  lose  it  (the  true  life) ;  but  he  that  hateth  his  life  in  this 
world  [i.  €.,  deems  it  valueless  in  comparison  with  the  interests  of  His 
kingdom),  shall  kcejy  it  unto  life  eternal.'" 

§  261.  Christ's  Struggles  of  Soul,  and  Submission  to  the  Divine  Will. 
—  The  Voice  from  Heaven.     (John,  xii.,  27-29.) 

At  the  same  time  that  the  great  creation  to  proceed  from  his  suffer- 
ings was  expanding  before  his  eyes,  the  struggles  of  soul  to  which  we 
have  before  alluded  were  renewed  within  him.  The  life  of  God  in 
him  did  not  exclude  the  uprising  of  human  feelings,  in  view  of  the 
sufferings  and  death  that  lay  before  him,  but  only  kej^t  them  in  their 
proper  limits.  Not  by  unhurnanizing  himself,  but  by  subordinating 
the  human  to  the  Divine,  was  he  to  realize  the  ideal  of  pure  human 
virtue ;  he  was  to  be  a  perfect  example  for  men,  even  in  the  struggles 
of  human  weakness. 

"  Now  is  7ny  soul  troubled  .^"  But,  sorely  as  the  terrors  of  his  dying 
struggle  pressed  upon  him,  they  could  not  shake  his  will,  strong  in 
God,  or  disturb  the  steadfast  calmness  of  his  mind.  He  does  not,  in 
obedience  to  the  voice  of  nature,  pray  to  be  exempted  from  the  dying 
hour:  "I  cannot  say,  Father,  save  me  from  this  hour;  for  this  cause 
have  I  been  brought  to  this  hour,  not  to  escape,  but  to  suffer  it."*  In 
full  consciousness  he  had  looked  forward  to  it  from  the  beginning,  as 
essential  to  the  fulfilment  of  his  work.  Therefore  all  his  feelings  and 
wishes  are  concentrated  upon  the  one  central  aim  of  his  whole  life, 
that  God  may  bo  glorified  in  mankind  by  his  sufferings :  '*  Father, 
glorify  thy  name .'" 

*  John,  xii.,  27.     Cf.  KUng,  Stud.  u.  Krit.,  1836,  iii.,  C76. 


THE  VOICE  FROM  HEAVEN.  377 

As  he  uttered  this  fervent  prayer,  the  very  breathing  of  unselfish 
holiness,  there  came  a  voice*  from  heaven,  heard  by  the  believing  souls 
who  stood  by  as  witnesses,  saying,  "  I  have  both  glorified  my  name  in 
thee,  and  will  continue  to  glorify  it.'^  All  his  previous  life,  in  which 
human  nature  had  been  made  the  organ  of  the  perfect  manifestation 
of  God  in  the  glory  of  His  holy  law,  had  glorified  the  name  of  God  ; 
and  now  his  sufferings,  and  their  results,  were  more  and  more  to  glo- 
rify that  Name,  in  the  establishment  of  His  kingdom  among  men. 
The  Saviour  himself,  however,  needed  no  assurance!  that  his  prayer 
was  accepted  :  "  This  voice  came  not  because  of  7ne,  but  for  your  sakesj" 

*  Some  interpret  this  account  as  a  mythus,  founded  upon  the  Jewish  idea  of  the  Bath- 
Col.  But  the  difficulties  in  the  account  are  not  of  a  nature  to  justify  this  view,  or  to  im- 
peach tlie  veracity  of  the  narrator.  On  the  contrary,  tlie  very  point  on  whicli  the  mythical 
theory  seizes,  viz.,  that  in  this  case  a  natural  phenomenon  conveyed  a  special  import  to  the 
religious  consciousness,  and  the  very  difficulty  itself  of  defining  the  relation  between  the 
subjective  and  the  objective,  tend  to  contirm  the  narrative  as  a  statement  of  fact.  Would 
the  writer  have  said  that  the  multitude  heard  only  the  thunder,  and  not  the  loords,  if  he 
meant  to  describe  a  voice  sounding  in  majesty  amid  the  thunder,  or  a  voice  sounding  with 
a  noise  like  thunder  ?  Certainly  he  would  have  represented  it  as  heard  by  all,  and  thus 
have  avoided  the  possible  interpretation  that  the  whole  phenomenon  was  merely  subject- 
ive. Only  on  the  supposition  that  it  was  a  real  fad,  related  by  an  eye-witness,  can  we 
account  for  the  clear  distinction  made  by  the  writer  between  his  own  experience  iu  the 
case  and  that  of  others,  difficult  as  it  may  be  for  us  to  discover  the  common  ground  of 
these  diverse  experiences. 

It  is  supposed  by  some  that  the  BathCol  was  nothing  else  but  a  subjective  interpreta- 
tion of  the  Divine  voice  in  thunder,  considered  as  an  omen  or  Divine  sign  of  answer  to 
prayer.  Even  if  this  theory  be  correct,  it  is  clear  that  John  did  not  mean  to  record  such  an 
omen  and  interpretation  ;  he  really  heard  the  words,  and  the  natural  phenomenon  must  have 
only  been  a  connecting  link  for  the  actual  apprehension  in  bis  religious  consciousness. 
The  matter  would  have  to  be  thus  conceived  :  The  impression  made  upon  John  by  Christ's 
words,  and  the  natural  phenomena  tliat  attended  them,  conspired  so  to  atiect  the  suscept- 
ible bystanders,  that  the  word  of  God  within  them  reechoed  the  words  of  Christ.  They 
were  assured  that  His  prayer  was  answered  ;  receiving,  in  fact,  the  same  impression  as 
that  reported  in  the  narrative,  though  in  a  diflereut  form.  And,  as  the  natural  phenomenon 
coincided  with  the  inward  operation  of  the  Divine  Spirit — a  word  from  the  Omnipi-esent 
God,  who  works  alike  iu  nature  and  iu  spirit^so  Christ,  who  knew  that  His  work  was  the 
father's,  and  always  recognized  God's  omnipresent  working,  both  in  nature  and  in  the 
hearts  of  men,  allowed  it  to  be  interpreted  as  a  voice  from  Heaven. 

But  the  conception  of  the  Bath-Col,  on  which  this  whole  interpretation  is  founded,  cannot 
be  sustained.  In  the  Rabbinical  passages  collected  by  Menschen  and  Vilringa  there  are 
no  traces  of  it:  they  interpret  the  Bath-Col  as  a  real  voice,  accompanied  by  thunder.  In 
the  Old  Testament,  thunder  often  appears  as  a  sii^n,  indeed,  but  as  a  sign  of  God's  anger 
or  majesty,  not  of  his  grace.  Still  there  are  difficulties  in  the  way  of  supposing  that  in  the 
case  before  us  this  voice  was  audible  simply  to  the  senses.  In  every  place  in  the  New 
Testament  in  which  such  a  voice  is  mentioned,  it  can  be  traced  back  to  an  inward  fact ; 
and,  in  the  case  in  question,  the  voice  was  heard  only  by  a  part,  the  susceptible  minds. 
The  hearing,  then,  depended  upon  the  spiritual  condition  of  the  hearer. 

Two  points  are  clearly  obvious :  (1)  there  was  thunder,  and  this  alone  was  heard  by  the 
unsusceptible  multitude;  (2)  there  was  a  voice  from  God,  beard  by  the  susceptible;  and 
these  last,  again,  lost  to  outward  and  sensible  impressions,  did  not  hear  the  thunder. 

In  my  view  of  this  event,  I  agree  for  the  most  part  (and  gladly)  with  my  worthy  friend 
Klinf^ ;  and  I  agree  with  him,  also,  that  it  is  better  to  acknowledge  the  existence  of  inex- 
plicable difficulties,  than  to  twist  the  text  and  histoi-y,  in  order  to  carry  out  some  theory 
which  may  suit  our  own  notions  (Stud.  u.  Krit.,  loc.  cit.,  G76,  677).  t  Cf.  p.  342. 


378  CHRIST  AT  JERUSALEM. 

He  interpreted  the  voice,  and  showed  them  liow  God  was  to  be  glo- 
rified in  him  :  "  Now  is  the  judgment  of  this  xcorld  ;  now  shall  the  prince 
of  this  world  he  cast  out.  And  I,  f  I  am  lifted  up  from  the  earth,  will 
draw  all  men  unto  meP  His  sufferings  are  his  triumph.  He  finishes 
his  work  in  them;  and  they  form  the  sentence  of  condemnation  to  the 
ungodly  world.  The  baselessness  of  Satan's  kingdom  is  laid  bare. 
The  Evil  One  is  cast  down  from  his  throne  among  men.  And  Christ's 
triumph  will  still  go  forward ;  the  power  of  evil  will  be  more  and  more 
diminished  ;  and  the  Glorified  One  will  not  only  free  his  followers  from 
that  evil  power,  but  will  exalt  them  to  communion  with  himself  in 
heaven, 

§  262.    Christ  closes  his  Public  Ministry. — Final  Words  of  warning  to 

the  Multitude. 
The  public  ministry  of  Jesus  was  closed  with  these  warning  words 
addressed  to  the  assembled  multitude :  "  Yet  a  little  while  is  the  light 
with  you  ;  walk  while  ye  have  the  light  (receive  it  by  faith,  and  become, 
by  communion  with  it,  children  of  the  light),  lest  darkness  come  upon 
you  (lest,  lost  in  darkness,  ye  hasten  headlong  to  your  own  destruc- 
tion) ;  for  he  that  walketh  in  dark?icss  knoweth  not  whither  he  goethT 

§  263.  Machinations  of  ChrisCs  Enemies. 

The  few  hours  that  intervened  between  the  end  of  Christ's  public 
ministry  and  his  arrest  were  devoted  to  instructing  and  comforting  his 
disciples  in  view  of  his  approaching  departure,  and  the  severe  conflicts 
they  were  to  undergo.  In  these  conversations  he  displayed  all  his 
heavenly  love  and  calmfiess  of  soul  ;  his  loftiness  and  his  humility.  In 
order  that  our  contemplation  of  these  sweet  scenes  may  not  be  inter- 
rupted, we  shall,  before  entering  upon  them,  glance  at  the  machina- 
tions of  his  enemies  which  brought  about  his  capture  and  his  death. 

As  we  have  seen,  tl^e  Sanhedrim  had  resolved  upon  his  death ;  all 
that  remained  was  to  decide  how  and  when  it  should  be  brought  about. 
The  time  of  the  feast  itself  would  have  been  unpropitious  for  the  at- 
tempt ;*  it  must  be  made,  therefore,  either  before  or  after.     The  for- 

*  Matt.,  xxvi.,  5,  implies  that  Jesus  was  arrested  before  the  commencement  of  the  Jew- 
ish Passover.  I  do  not  see  the  justice  of  Weissc's  (i.,  444)  assertion,  that  this  view  of  the 
passage  is  opposed  to  its  natural  sense.  The  passage  certainly  implies  (what  is  most  im- 
portant for  my  purpose)  that  he  was  not  apprehended  on  the  feast -da  i/ ;  whether  before  or 
after  is  left  undecided.  But  this  information  is  not  sufticient  to  show  an  inaccuracy  in  the 
chronology  of  the  first  three  Gospels.  For  we  might  suppose  that  the  Sanhedrim  were  led, 
by  the  opportunity  ailbrded  by  the  treachery  of  Judas,  to  seize  Jesus  quietly  at  uighf, 
obandoniiig  their  original  design.  It  would  therefore  follow,  at  any  rate,  that  they  had  not 
decided  to  efi'oct  their  purpose  during  the  feast ;  and  they  may  have  made  up  their  minds 
to  wait  until  its  close,  when  the  unexpected  proposition  of  Judas  led  them  to  attempt  it 
during  the  feast.  But  it  is  not  probable  that  they  would  allow  Christ,  unmolested,  to  make 
use  of  the  time  of  the  feast  to  increase  his  followers  among  the  multitude.     We  shall  see 


MOTIVES  OF  JUDAS.  379 

raer  was  tlie  safest,  and  therefore  the  favorite  plan.  An  unexpected 
and  most  favourable  opening  was  afforded,  by  the  proposition  oi  Judas 
Iscarioi,  to  deliver  him  into  their  hands.* 

§  264.    The  Motives  of  Judas  in  betraying  Jesus. 

It  is  difficult  to  decide  upon  the  motives  that  impelled  Judas  to  the 
outrage  which  he  perpetrated.  How  could  one  that  had  daily  enjoyed 
the  influences  of  Christ's  Divine  life,  had  been  a  witness  of  his  mighty 
works,  and  received  so  many  proofs  of  his  love,  have  been  driven  to 
such  a  fatal  step  ]  It  cannot  be  supposed,  as  we  have  before  remarked, t 
that  he  originally  attached  himself  to  Jesus  for  the  purpose  of  betray- 
ing him ;  it  rather  appears  that  his  motives  were  at  first  as  pure  as 
those  of  the  rest  of  the  disciples.  Had  not  Christ  seen  in  him  capa- 
cities which,  with  proper  cultivation,  might  have  made  him  an  efficient 
Apostle,  he  would  not  have  received  him  into  his  narrower  circle  on  the 
same  footing  with  the  others,  and  sent  him  out  along  with  them  on  the 
first  trial  mission. §  Nor  does  this  view  deny  either  that  the  evil  germ 
which,  when  fully  developed,  led  him  to  his  great  crime,  lay  in  his 
heart  at  the  time  ;  or  that  Christ  saw  the  evil  as  well  as  the  good.§ 
But  the  Saviour  may  have  hoped  to  make  the  latter  preponderate  over 
the  former. 

Among  the  possible  motives  for  the  crime  of  Judas  are,  (1.)  His  al- 
leged avarice ;  (2.)  Jewish  views  of  Christ's  Messiahship  on  his  part ; 
and,  (3.)  A  gradual  growth  of  hostile  feelings  in  his  heart.  These  we 
shall  now  examine  in  order. 

hereafter  that  there  are  strong  objections  to  the  opinion  that  Christ  was  cnieified  on  the 
first  day  of  the  feast ;  and  these,  if  valid,  will  confirm  our  supposition  that  he  was  arrested 
on  the  day  before  its  commencement.     Cf.  Gfiirer,  iii,  198. 

*  Matt.,  xxvi.,  14-lG  ;  Mark,  xiv.,  10,  11;  Luke,  xxii.,  3-6.  These  passages  agree  in 
showing  that  Judas  made  his  bargain  with  the  Sanhedrim  before  the  night  on  which  he 
consummated  his  treacheiy.  It  might  be  infen-ed  from  John,  xiii.,  26,  that  he  only  imbibed 
the  Satanic  thought  on  rising  from  the  Last  Supper;  but  how  could  he  have  negotiated 
with  the  Sanhedrim  so  late  in  the  night,  and  just  before  the  fatal  act  ?  John  himself  says 
(xiii.,  2)  that  the  devil  had  before  put  it  in  his-heart  to  do  it.  We  conclude,  therefore,  that 
V.  26  refers  to  the  last  step — the  execution  of  his  evil  purpose  ;  and  this  agrees  very  well 
with  the  supposition  that  he  had  previously  arranged  all  the  preliminaries.  A  favourable 
moment  only  was  wanting ;  and  this  he  found  during  that  last  interview  with  Jesus. 

t  Cf.  p.  118.  t  Cf  p.  257,  seq. 

$  John,  vi.,  64,  teaches  that  Jesus  knew  at  once  the  motives  of  all  that  attached  them- 
selves to  him.  No  mock  faith,  founded  on  carnal  inclinations,  could  deceive  him,  and  there- 
fore he  knew  at  once  the  spiritual  character  of  the  one  that  should  betray  him.  The  pas- 
sage does  not  necessarily  imply  that  he  marked  at  first  the  person  of  the  traitor ;  but  only 
that  he  noticed  in  Judas,  from  the  very  beginning,  the  disposition  of  heart  that  finally  led 
him  to  become  a  traitor.  But  it  need  not  appear  strange  to  us  if  John,  after  so  many 
proofs  of  the  superhuman  prescience  of  Jesus,  attributed  to  the  indefinite  intimations  of 
Christ,  given  by  him  to  Judas  in  order  to  make  him  know  himself,  more  than  was  really  ex- 
pressed by  them  at  the  time. 


380  CHRIST  AT  JERUSALEM. 

.  (^-^ 
Was  Judas  impelled  by  avarice  ? 

There  are  certain  intimations  in  the  Evangelists  that  appear  to  fa- 
vour the  hypothesis  that  avarice  was  his  leading  motive.  In  John,  xii., 
6,  this  vice  is  ascribed  to  him,  and  he  is  charged  with  embezzlinor 
money  from  the  common  purse,  committed  to  his  charge  as  treasurer. 
Moreover,  according  to  the  synoptical  Gospels,  he  bargained  for  a 
certain  sum  of  money,  as  the  price  of  his  treachery.  It  might  be  in 
ferred,  therefore,  that  a  love  of  money,  which  sought  to  gratify  itself 
by  any  means,  even  by  the  violation  of  a  sacred  trust,  grew  upon  him 
to  such  an  extent  as  finally  to  induce  the  commission  of  his  awful 
crime. 

But  there  are  many  and  strong  objections  to  this  view  of  the  case. 
If  Judas's  avarice  were  so  intense,  it  is  difficult  to  conceive  how  Christ, 
whose  piercing  glance  penetrated  the  recesses  of  men's  hearts,  could 
have  received  him  into  the  number  of  the  disciples.  Could  He,  who 
knew  so  well  how  to  adapt  the  special  duties  which  he  assigned  his 
followers  to  their  individual  peculiarities,  have  allowed  precisely  this 
most  avaricious  disciple  to  keep  charge  of  the  common  purse  1  And, 
had  he  attributed  Judas's  i-eproof  of  Mary*  (John,  xii.,  5)  to  this  mo- 
tive, would  he  not  have  noticed  it  in  his  reply  ?t  It  must  be  remem- 
bered, John's  explanation  (v.  6)  was  added  after  Judas  was  known  to 
have  bargained  to  betray  his  Master  for  money.  Had  such  an  accusa- 
tion been  made  at  an  earlier  period,  he  would  doubtless  have  been  re- 
moved from  the  ti'easurership.  In  all  Christ's  allusions  to  the  charac- 
ter of  Judas  that  have  come  down  to  us,  there  is  not  the  slightest  indi- 
cation that  He  thought  it  necessary  to  warn  him  against  this  sin. 
There  may,  indeed,  have  been  indications  in  John's  memory  which  he 
believed  to  afford  sufficient  ground  for  such  a  charge  ;|  and,  after  at- 
tributing the  treachery  of  Judas  in  betraying  Christ  to  avarice,  he 
might  have  been  led  to  look  for  traces  of  the  same  vice  in  his  previous 
management  of  the  common  funds.  " 

Again,  it  is  difficult  to  understand,  if  the  crime  was  committed  for 
the  sake  of  money  alone,  how  so  small  a  sum  as  thirty  shekels^  could 

*  Cf.  p.  353. 

t  Dr.  Gr.  Schollmcj/cr,  a  young  but  promising  theologian,  remarks  this  in  his  "  Jesus  and 
.Tudas,"  Liincburg,  183G. 

t  S/rariss  (iii.,  432,  3'''  Aufl.)  thinks  this  is  inconsistent  with  my  fuiidnmental  principle, 
since  I  acknowledge  the  Apostle  John  as  the  author  of  this  Gospel ;  just  as  if  I  accused 
the  Apostle  of  a  groundless  slander.  The  black  deed  of  Judas  justified  John  in  ascribing 
this  vice  to  him,  rs  many  of  his  recollections  seemed  to  indicate  it.  He  certainly  could 
not  be  expected  to  exercise  a  cool  impartiality  towards  the  traitor.  In  the  mean  time,  I 
think  I  am  justified  in  saying  that  John's  allusions  are  not  to  be  taken  ynconditionally  as 
proof.  But  tlie  single  trait  of  avarice  suits  well  the  general  character  of  Judas,  in  whom 
eaitidy  aims  wore  all-controlling. 

$  Between  25  and  26  rix  dollars.  Twenty  shekels  =  120  denarii,  and  one  denarius  was 
at  that  time  the  ordinary  wages  for  a  day's  labour  (Matt.,  xx.,  2) ;  so  that  the  whole  sum 


THE  MOTIVES  OF  JUDAS.  381 

have  satisfied  the  traitor*  Would  not  the  Sanhedrim,  in  view  of  the 
importance  of  getting  hold  of  Jesus  quietly,  before  the  feast  began, 
freely  have  given  Judas  more  if  he  had  asked  it  1  True,  that  body 
may  have  relied  upon  the  surety  of  seizing  him  in  some  way,  and  upon 
the  impression,  gathered  from  his  character,  that  he  would  cause  no 
rescue  to  be  attempted ;  and,  therefore,  so  far  as  their  nfcr  is  con- 
cerned, thirty  pieces  is  likely  enough. 

On  the  whole,  then,  we  conclude  that  to  gain  so  small  a  sum  of 
money  could  not  have  been  Judas's  chief  motive.  And,  even  had  the 
sum  been  a  large  one,  it  remains  almost  impossible  to  conceive  that 
avarice  alone  could  lead  him  to  deliver  Jesus  over  to  his  foes,  if  he 
really  were  impressed  with  a  sense  of  his  Divinity  and  Messiahship. 
It  must  be  presupposed  that  he  had  stood  for  some  time  in  a  spiritual 
relation  to  Christ  different  from  that  of  the  other  Apostles ;  and  when 
this  is  once  admitted,  avarice  is  a  superfluous  motive. 

(2.) 

Was  Judas  impelled  by  Jewish  views  of  Christ's  Messiahship'? 

Did  Judas  foresee  and  intend  to  bring  about  the  result  which  fol- 
lowed Christ's  arrest  1  The  answer  to  this  question  will  obviously  go 
a  great  way  in  fixing  our  opinion  of  his  character  and  motives.  It  is 
connected  with  another,  viz.,  in  what  way  did  the  traitor  himself  die  1 
If,  according  to  Matthew's  account,  he  committed  suicide  immediately 
after  Christ's  condemnation,  we  might  infer  that  he  did  not  intend  this 
result,  and  was  thrown  into  despair  by  it. 

This  inference  has  led  some  to  the  opiniont  that  Judas  expected 
Christ's  arrest  only  to  bring  about  the  triumph  of  his  cause  by  com- 

amounted  to  about  four  months'  wages  of  a  day-labourer.  (Cf.  Panhis  on  Matt.,  sxvi.,  16.) 
Thiity  shekels,  it  is  to  be  noticed,  was  the  value  set  upon  a  single  slave,  according  to 
Exod.,  xxi.,  32. 

*  It  is  questioned,  with  some  plausibility,  by  Strauss  and  De  Wette,  whether  the  pre- 
cise sum,  thirty  shekch,  is  correctly  given.  Their  arguments  are  that  Matthew  alone  men- 
tions it  (xxvi.,  15),  while  in  Mark  and  Luke  only  the  general  term  ap)'t'piov  is  given  ;  and 
that  the  tendency  of  Mntthew  to  find  types  of  Christ's  history  in  the  Old  Testament  in- 
duced him  to  fix  this  precise  sum,  in  view  of  Zech.,  xi.,  12  (cf  Matt.,  xxvii.,  9). 

Without  making  any  positive  assertion,  we  must  observe  on  this  (1)  that,  although  Mark 
and  Luke  do  not  expressly  mention  the  small  sum.  they  would  not  have  used  the  indefinite 
term  apyvpwv,  if  the  sum  had  been  known  to  be  large ;  (2)  although  there  is  a  discrepancy 
between  Matt.,  xxvii.,  7,  and  Acts,  i.,  18,  yet  this  discrepancy  seems  to  presuppose  that 
the  money  was  just  sufficient  to  purchase  a  field,  which  certainly  could  not  have  required 
a  larg'e  sum;  (3)  the  passage  in  the  Old  Testament  alone  would  not  have  been  enough  to 
induce  the  assignment  of  so  small  a  sum,  in  the  face  of  the  probability,  on  the  other  side, 
that  the  Sanhedrim  would  give  a  large  amount  to  secure  so  important  an  end ;  (4)  it  could 
not  have  been  invented  to  blacken  the  character  of  Judas  still  further:  his  deed  must  have 
been  black  enough  at  any  price  ;  (5)  there  is  no  great  improbability  in  tlie  Sanhedrim's  of- 
fering so  small  a  reward :  people  of  this  stamp  would  give  Juda&  no  more  than  the  lowest 
possible  price  for  which  he  would  do  the  deed ;  and  their  fanatical  hatred  of  Christ  may 
have  led  them  to  offer  exactly  the  price  of  a  slave,  in  order  to  degrade  the  character  of 
Jesus.  t  See,  especially,  ScJwUmei/er's  Treatise,  above  cited. 


382  CHRIST  AT  JERUSALEM. 

pelling  liim  to  establish  his  visible  Messianic  kingdom.  If  this  were 
the  case,  the  traitor  must  have  expected  either  (1)  that  the  enthusiastic 
multitude  would  rescue  Christ  by  force  and  make  him  king;  or  (2) 
that  Christ  himself,  by  an  exertion  of  his  miraculous  power,  would 
overthrow  his  foes  and  establish  his  kingdom.  But  the  Jirst  is  utterly 
untenable ;  little  as  Judas  may  have  known  of  Christ's  spirit,  he  ?nust 
liave  known  that  He  would  not  make  use  of  worldly  power  to  accom- 
plish his  purposes;  nor  could  he  himself  have  supposed  such  power  to 
be  needed,  if  (according  to  the  hypothesis)  he  acknowledged  Jesus  as 
Messiah. 

The  second  view  may  be  more  fully  stated  thus  :  Holding  the  same 
Messianic  expectations  as  the  other  Apostles,  he  only  gave  way  more 
entirely  to  a  wilful  impatience  ;  Christ  delayed  too  long  for  him ;  he 
planned  the  arrest  to  hasten  his  decision,  surely  expecting  a  display 
of  his  miraculous  power,  and  the  establishment  of  his  visible  kingdom. 
TeiTible  was  his  consternation  when  he  saw  the  Saviour,  whom  he 
loved,  condemned  to  death  !  Not,  however,  that  his  act  is  in  the 
slightest  degree  justified.  It  was  sinful  wilfulness  to  seek  to  control 
the  actions  of  Him  whose  wise  guidance,  as  Lord  and  Master,  he  ought 
to  have  followed  in  all  things.  He  sacrificed  all  other  considerations 
to  his  own  arbitrarily-conceived  idea,  and  acted  upon  that  vile  prin- 
ciple which  has  given  birth  to  the  most  destructive  deeds  recorded  in 
history — that  the  end  sanctifies  the  means.  Still  his  decision  of  char- 
acter and  energy  of  will,  if  sacrificed  in  obedience  to  Christ's  spirit, 
would  have  made  him  a  most  efficient  agent  in  propagating  the  Gos- 
pel, and  pi'ove  that  Christ  had  good  reasons  for  receiving  him  into  the 
number  of  the  Apostles. 

Such  is  the  second  hypothesis.  But  if  .Tudas  acted  on  such  prin- 
ciples, would  Jesus  have  abandoned,  him  to  his  delusion,  and  allowed 
him  to  rush  blindly  on  destruction  1  The  authority  of  Christ  as  Prophet 
and  Messiah  (and,  according  to  the  hypothesis,  Judas  recognized  him 
as  such)  could  easily  have  removed  the  scales  from  the  eyes  of  the 
deluded  Apostle.  Could  the  Saviour  possibly  have  uttered  a  word  at 
the  Last  Supper  (John,  xiii.,  27)  that  might  be  interpreted  into  an  ap- 
proval of  his  undertaking] 

The  hypothesis,  then,  must  at  least  be  modified  into  the  view  that 
Judas's  faith  wavered  because  Christ  was  making  no  preparations  for 
u  visible  kingdom  ;  the  result  alone  could  solve  his  doubts ;  and  there- 
fore he  brought  about  the  arrest,  reasoning  on  this  wise:  "If  Jesus  is 
really  Messiah,  no  power  of  the  world  can  harm  him,  and  all  opposi- 
tion will  only  serve  to  glorify  him  ;  if,  on  the  other  hand,  he  succumbs, 
it  must  be  taken  as  a  judgment  of  God  against  him."  His  subsequent 
repentance  is  not  inconsistent  with  this  view ;  his  conclusions  a/}er  the 
result,  when,  perhaps,  the  full  power  of  Christ's  image  stood  before 


THE  MOTIVES  OF  JUDAS.  383 

him,  may  have  been  very  different  from  what  he  had  expected.  As  a 
general  thing,  the  impressions  made  upon  a  man  by  the  results  of  his 
actions  testify  but  little  as  to  the  character  of  his  motives ;  none  can 
tell  how  an  evil  deed,  even  when  deliberately  planned  and  perpetrated, 
will  react  upon  the  conscience. 

(3.) 
Was  Judas  impelled  by  a  gradually  developed  hostility  ] 
The  mode  of  Judas's  death,*  as  we  have  seen,  is  not  sufficient  to 
prove  that  his  purpose  in  delivering  Christ  to  the  Sanhedrim  was  not  a 
decidedly  hostile  one. 

The  final  view  before  mentioned  may  be  stated  thus  :  The  first  feel- 
ings of  Judas,  in  attaching  himself  to  Christ,  were  the  same  as  those 
of  the  other  Apostles.  He  had  a  practical  and  administrative  talent, 
which  caused  him  to  be  made  treasurer ;  and  which  may  have  been 
usefully  employed  in  organizing  the  first  Christian  congregations.  But 
the  element  of  carnal  selfishness,  although  it  affected  the  other  Apostles 
more  or  less,  was  in  him  deeply  rooted  ;  the  Spirit  and  love  of  Christ 
could  not  gain  the  same  power  over  him  as  over  the  other  more  spirit- 
ually-minded disciples.  As  he  gradually  found  that  his  expectations 
were  to  be  disappointed,  his  attachment  turned  more  and  more  into 
aversion.  When  the  manifestation  of  Christ  ceased  to  be  attractive,  it 
became  repulsive ;  and  more  and  more  so  every  day.  The  miracles 
alone  could  not  revive  his  faith,  so  long  as  he  lacked  the  disposition  to 
perceive  Divinity  in  them.  If  Christ  showed  striking  proofs  of  Divine 
power,  so,  also,  ho  gave  evident  signs  of  human  weakness ;  and  the 
sight  of  the  latter  could  easily  cause  an  estranged  heart  to  doubt  and 
hesitate  in  regard  to  the  former.  A  man's  view  even  of  facts  depends 
upon  the  tendencies  of  his  mind  and  heart ;  these  necessarily  give  their 
own  hue  to  his  interpretations  even  of  what  his  eyes  behold.t     Nor  do 

*  Matthew's  accouut  of  the  deatli  of  Judas  stands  in  (at  least)  partial  contradiction  to 
Acts,  i.,  18,  which  states  that  Judas  bought  a  field  with  the  money,  and  met  his  death  by 
falling  from  a  height.  Tliis  may,  indeed,  possibly  mean  suicide  ;  but  it  is  doubtful.  The 
wild  and  fabulous  narrative  of  Papias  (first  published  by  Cramer,  Catena  in  Acta  S.  Apost., 
Oxon.,  1836,  p.  12)  presupposes  that  Judas  did  not  die  by  his  own  hand.  "  Mtya  fit  dacScias 
tiro^£()7ja  iv  TOVTif)  tu>  KoVfUj)  TTcpttTTuT7]aev  b  'loiiaS  '  TrptjaOcis  Ittitooovtov  ttjv  aapKa,  SiiTt  uribl  huoQcD 
&lia\a  StipxcTai  paiiwS  ixehov  fvvaadat  Sie\9uv  •  dAXu  ixr]&i  avTov  /xdvov  tov  t?iS  K£0aA^s  Syxov  oiroii  • 
ra  itiv  ydp  pXfipiipa  tmv  6(fiOn}>nuiv  avrov  (paal  tobovtov  l^oiffjaat,  (1>S  avTuv  filv  Ka06\ov  rd  i^fhi  itrj 
/jXtTTfii'  •  TOPS  AiJiOa}>iiovg  ii  avrov  /irifi  bird  laTpdv  iidirrpui  6<j)6rivai  Svvacdai '  Toaovrov  PdOoi  tlxov 
avb  Tij?  i\iii6tv  i-KKpaviiai  ■  to  ii  alSolov  aiiou  -narjS  ncv  aaxil'ooii'rji  ariiiaripov  Kai  nuX,ov  (paivcaOai  ' 
(pipzodai  6i  it'  avTov  tK  Ttavrbi  tov  awnarog  avppeovTai  iX'^P"!  ''£  Kai  CKwh/Kai  as  'iSpiv  6t'  avrCiv  ix6vov 
Tuv  dvayKaiiov  •  ixcTii  iroAXas  ii  Paadvovi  Kai  Tijiwplni,  iv  M/u  (fiaoi  X'^P'-V  TtXevrrjiravTa '  Kai  tovto  anb 
T?;f  bSov  epriijiov  Kai  doiKriTOv  to  X'^P'Ov  f  fX/"  ^rji  vvv  ytvicQai '  dW  oiSi  liixpi  Ttji  urjjitpov  ivvaoQai 
Tiva  iKcivov  rbv  tottov  TtaptXOuv,  idv  prj  Tui  ph'aS  tqiS  XcfXJiV  i-KL(f>pd\r]  •  ToadvTrj  Sid  rfiS  aapKuS  airou 
Kai  cTTi  yrjs  Kpiati  ix'^PV'^^f-"  It  is  easy  to  see  how  the  expressions  in  Acts  could  give  rise 
to  this  extravagant  legend. 

1  The  following  profound  thought  of  Pascal,  abundantly  verified  in  history,  may  be  ap- 
plied to  the  scientitic  treatment  of  the  Life  of  Christ,  and  to  those  who  boast  a  cold  impar 


384  THE  LAST  SUPPER. 

we  know  how  far  the  crafty  Pharisees  understood  Judas  and  tampered 
with  him.  It  was  just  at  the  time  of  the  sifting,  before  alluded  to,* 
among  the  masses  that  had  followed  Christ,  that  the  spirit  of  enmity 
seems  to  have  germinated  in  the  heait  of  Judas,  and  Christ  noticed  and 
intimated  it  (John,  vi.,  70) ;  although  it  could  not,  all  at  once,  have 
become  predominant  in  him  :  there  were,  doubtless,  inward  struggles 
before  the  fatal  tendency  acquired  full  sway.t 

The  life  of  man  furnishes  many  analogies  that  may  help  to  clear  up 
the  enigmatical  conduct  of  Judas.  He  who  does  not  follow  the  im- 
pulses of  good  which  he  receives  from  within  and  without,  but  rather 
gives  himself  up  to  the  selfish  propensities  which  those  impulses  are 
meant  to  counteract,  becomes  finally  and  iiTecoverably  enslaved  to 
them  ;  all  things  that  ought  to  work  together  for  his  good  serve  for  his 
harm  ;  the  healing  balm  becomes  for  him  a  poison.  This  is  the  severe 
judgment  upon  which  our  free  agency  is  conditioned ;  and  to  it  may 
we  apply  the  saying  of  our  Lord  :  "  From  him  that  hath  not,  shall  he 
taken  away  even-  that  which  he  hath.'"' 


CHAPTER  n. 

THE  LAST  SUPPER  OF  .lESUS  WITH  THE  DISCIPLES. 
§  265.    Object  of  Christ  in  the  Last  Supjycr. 

JESUS  looked  forward  without  fear,  nay,  with  confidence,  to  the 
fate  that  awaited  him.  We  need  not  necessarily  presuppose  that 
he  was  supernaturally  informed  of  it ;  for  it  may  be  said  that  his 
friends  in  the  Sanhedrim  (and  he  had  such)  informed  him  of  the  nego- 
tiations of  Judas.  He  foresaw  that  he  would  have  to  leave  his  disci- 
ples before  the  proper  Passover,|  and  determined  to  give  a  peculiar 

tiality  in  regard  to  it:  "Lavolonte  est  un  des  principaux  organes  de  la  creancc,  non  qu'elle 
forme  la  cr^ance,  mais  parce  que  les  choses  paraissent  vrayes  on  fausses,  selon  la  face,  par 
oil  on  les  regarde.  La  volonte,  qui  se  plaist  h  I'une  plus  qu'a  I'autre,  d^toume  I'esprit.  de 
considerer  les  qualitez  de  celle,  qu'elle  n'aime  pas,  et  ainsi  I'esprit  uiarchant  d'uiie  piece 
avec  la  rolonte,  s'arreste  h  regarder  la  face  qu'elle  aime,  et  on  jugeaut  parcc  qu'il  y  voit, 
11  regie  insensiblement  sa  cr6ance  suivant  rinclination  de  la  volonte."  *  P.  268,  269. 

t  'We  do  not  wish  to  be  understood  as  attempting  a  full  explanation  of  the  conduct  of 
Judas,  so  enigmatical  in  itself,  and  so  little  explained  by  the  accounts  that  are  left  to  us. 
■We  have  only  sought  to  present  the  theory  which  seems  to  us  most  probable  from  the  data 
before  ub. 

t  I  presuppose,  with  Idder,  Liicke.  Sieffcrt,  De  Welte,  and  Bkek,  that  the  Last  Supper 
was  held,  not  on  the  11th  Nisan,  the  holy  Passover  eve,  but  on  the  13th,  and  that  the  Fri- 
day of  his  passion  was  that  lioly  evening,  (a.)  A  candid  interpretation  of  John's  Gospel 
confirms  this  supposition.  'V\''e  cannot  infer  much  from  xiii.,  ],  2,  although  that  passage 
senms  to  imply  that  the  supper  occurred  before  the  beginning  of  the  feast.  But  xviii.,  28, 
tells  us  that  the  deputies  of  the  Sanhedrim  would  not  enter  the  Proetorium  for  fear  of  defile- 


DATE  OF  THE  SUPPER.  385 

import  to  his  last  meal  with  them,  to  place  it  in  a  peculiar  relation  to 
the  Jewish  Passover,  as  the  Christian  covenant-meal  was  to  take  the 

ment,  as  they  had  to  eat  the  Passover  ou  that  evening.  The  words  'iva  (fydywci  rb  iraoxa  mu.it 
be  apphed,  according;  to  prevailing  usage,  botli  among  Jews  and  Christians,  to  the  feast  of 
Passover.  It  is  objected  that  this  care  was  needless,  as,  if  a  defilement  were  thus  incurred, 
it  would  not,  on  account  of  the  DV  ^^2l2,  last  until  the  evening;  i.  e.,  until  the  beginning 
of  the  following  day  ;  but  this  is  easily  answered  ;  many  things  had  to  be  done  as  prepara- 
toiy  to  the  feast,  which  would  trench  upon  both  days.  In  xix.,  31,  the  day  of  the  cnici- 
tixion  is  treated  as  an  ordinary  Friday.  No  scruples  were  entertained  about  the  crucifix- 
ion on  that  day,  but  only  about  leaving  the  bodies  on  the  cross  on  the  Sahhalh,  which  was 
Rjixed  feast-day.  But  how  could  the  Friday,  if  it  were  the  first  day  of  the  piincipal  feast, 
be  treated  as  an  ordinary  Friday?  All  difficulties  are  removed  bj'  supposing  that  it  icax 
only  a  common  Friday,  and  that  the  next  day  was  at  once  the  Sabbath  and  the  first  day  of 
the  Passover  feast.  Even  if  the  Sanhedrim  were  compelled  to  expedite  the  crucifixion  of 
Christ,  and  were  impelled,  in  their  fanatical  hatred,  to  violate  the  sanctity  of  the  feast  by 
it,  yet  is  it  hkely  that  they  would  have  waited  just  to  the  hohest  feast-day  for  the  cruci- 
fixion of  the  malefactors,  or  that  the  pardon  of  a  condemned  crimmal  (granted  by  the  Ro- 
mans in  honour  of  the  feast)  would  have  been  delayed  until  tke  feast  had  begun  ?  But  the 
haste  and  the  pardon  would  harmonize  well  with  the  view  that  the  crucifixion  took  place 
before  the  feast,  on  the  13th  Nisan.  (b.)  Liicke  has  called  attention  to  two  passages  in  1  Cor- 
inthians, though  without  deeming  them  perfectly  conclusive  (Gotting.  Anzeig.) :  (1.)  The 
first  passage  is  1  Cor.,  v.,  7,  8,  in  which  Paul  seems  to  contrast  the  Christian  with  the  Jew- 
ish Passover  as  held  at  the  same  time  (Christ,  as  the  spiritual  Passover,  as  sacrificed  simul- 
taneously with  the  Jewish  Paschal  lamb  ;  (iJ.)  1  Cor.,  xi.,  23,  speaks  indefinitely  of  the  night 
of  Christ's  betrayal,  not  of  his  partaking  of  the  Passover,  (c.)  It  may,  perhaps,  be  the 
case  that  in  Matt.,  xxvi.,  18,  the  writer  presupposed  that  Christ  really  partook  of  the  Pass- 
over with  his  disciples  ;  but  may  not  the  passage  mean,  "  My  time  for  leaving  the  world  is 
at  hand ;  and  therefore  I  will  celebrate  the  Passover  to-day  with  my  disciples,  in  anticipa- 
tion 1"  (d.)  lu  Luke,  xxiii.,  54,  the  day  of  the  crucifixion  is  mentioned  as  a  common  Fri- 
day (the  day  of  preparation),  a  day  ou  which  there  could  be  no  scruples  about  any  kind  of 
business  ;  but  would  it  have  been  so  mentioned  if  it  had  been  the  first  day  of  Passover, 
the  greatest  feast-day  in  all  the  year  ?  (e.)  The  general  diffusion  of  the  belief  that  Christ 
held  a  proper  Passover  with  his  disciples  may  be  explained  on  the  ground  that  Christ 
really  did  hold  his  last  supper  with  reference  and  allusion  to  the  Passover  supper  and  the 
ceremonies  that  accompanied  it ;  that  the  first  Christians,  intent  upon  the  substance,  paid 
little  heed  to  chronological  niceties;  that  the  Jewish-Christians  kept  up  the  Jewish  usage 
of  the  Passover,  giving  it,  however,  a  Christian  import;  while  the  purely  Gentile  converts 
kept  no  such  festal  seasons.  The  interchange  of  the  first  day  of  unleavened  bread  (as- the 
day  of  Christ's  passion) 'with  the  first  day  of  the  Passover  feast  may  also  have  contributed 
to  it.  These  grounds  might  suffice  to  explain  the  admission  into  the  synoptical  Gospels  of 
the  idea  that  the  Passion  occurred  on  the  first  day  of  the  Passover;  but  arc  utterly  incon 
sistent  with  the  hypothesis  that  the  author  of  John's  Gospel  (whether  it  be  admitted  as 
genuine  or  not)  could  have  inserted  and  got  into  circulation  a  statement  invented  by  him- 
self, and  conflicting  with  the  general  stream  of  tradition.  John's  chronology,  as  we  have 
said,  is  consistent  throughout ;  but  that  of  the  synoptical  Gospels  presents  discrepancies 
that  appear  irreconcilable. 

Little  use  can  be  made  of  the  ancient  disputes  about  the  Passover;  from  such  mere 
fragments  we  cannot  decide  how  far  the  Evangelical  accounts  were  appealed  to.  The  ad- 
vocates of  the  occidental  usage,  Apollinaris  of  Hierapolis,  Clement  of  Ale.xandria,  and 
Hippolytus,  appealed  to  John's  Gospel  (if  the  fragments  in  Chronicon  paschale  Alexandri- 
num,  ed.  Niebuhr,  Dindorf,  i.,  13,  are  genuine)  to  prove  that  the  Last  Supper  was  not  a  Pass- 
over proper.  Polycratcs,  bishop  of  Ephesus  (Eus.,  Hist.  Eccl.,  v.,  24)  appealed  to  "  the  Gos- 
pel" in  behalf  of  the  opposite  usage;  but  whether  he  appealed,  under  the  title  "the  Gospel," 
to  one,  or  all  of  the  Evangelists,  we  cannot  conceive  how  he  could  reconcile  the  declara- 
tions in  John  with  the  Passover  usages  of  Asia  Minor  (cf  Dr.  Rettberg's  Abhandl.  iib.  d. 
Paschastreit,  Ilgen's  Zeitsclirift  fur  Histor.  Theol.,  ii.,  2,  119).    What  is  the  meaning  of 


386  THE  LAST  SUPPER. 

place  of  that  of  the  Old  Testament.  Perhaps,  as  the  Sanhedrim  had 
determined  to  cany  out  their  plans  against  him  before  the  feast,  he 
spent  Thursday,  13th  Nisan,  in  Bethany,  in  order  to  employ  these  last 
hours  with  the  disciples  undisturbed.  In  the  morning  he  sent  Peter 
and  John  into  the  city,  to  make  the  necessary  preparations  for  the 
Passover  supper.  To  preserve  secrecy,  and  avoid  all  hazard  of  sur- 
prise by  the  Sanhedrim,  he  designated  the  house  at  which  the  supper 
was  to  be  held  by  a  sign  understood  by  its  owner,  without  specifying 
the  name  of  the  latter,* 

Two  prominent  acts  of  Christ  marked  this  last  meal  with  the  disci- 
ples, viz.,  the  wasliing  of  feet  and  the  institution  of  the  Lord's  Siij)per.\ 

§  266.  Christ  washes  the  Disciples'  Feet.  Conversation  with  Peter  in. 
regard  to  it.     (John,  xiii.,  2-16.) 

In  washing  the  disciples'  feet,  Christ. obviously  intended  to  impress 
vividly  and  permanently  upon  their  minds,  by  means  of  a  specific  act, 
a  general  truth ;  and  to  remove  those  carnal  expectations  of  a  secular 
kingdom,  and  the  selfishness  necessarily  connected  therewith,  which 
were  not  yet  wholly  banished  from  their  minds.| 

Such  an  act,  on  the  part  of  the  Divine  Master,  must  doubtless  have 
surprised  more  than  one  of  the  disciples.  That  He,  the  object  of  their 
deepest  reverence  and  love,  should  do  for  them  so  lowly  a  service,  may 
well  have  been  a  surprise  and  a  contradiction  to  their  feelings.  Yet 
that  same  reverence  prevented  them  from  resisting  his  will.  But  the 
fiery  and  impetuous  Peter  could  not  so  command  his  feelings  :  "  Lord, 

the  words  of  Polycrates,  aytiv,  rripdv  rfiv  I'liu'pavl  Not,  certainly,  the  keeinnj  of  the  Pas- 
chal supper ;  nor  the  Jewish  Passover,  assisted  at  by  Christians ;  for  the  added  words 
vdvTOTC  rrii'  fifilpav  riyayov  o\  cvyytvcii  iiov,  orav  tGjv  'loviaiijiv  h  Xadi  iipvvi  rfiv  S''/"?^',  would  then  be 
sheer  tautology.  He  must  have  meant,  then,  "  the  day  for  commemorating  the  passion  of 
Christ."  If,  then,  it  is  in  this  sense  that  Polycrates  says  of  "  all  the  bLshops  of  Lesser  Asia 
since  the  time  of  St.  John,"  that  they  -uirts  irnpijcav  ti'iv  I'lutpav  n)s  TcacapiiKaiitKdTtii  tou 
■rtdcxa  Kara  to  chayyiXior,  he  obviously  means  that  they  "  all  celebrated  the  14th  Nisan,"  on 
which  the  Jewish  Passover  began,  in  commemoration  of  om-  Lord's  Passion ;  and  for  con- 
firmation of  this  he  might  very  well  appeal  to  the  Gospel  of  John. 

We  must  also  allude  to  a  remarkable  passage  in  Hippolytus  (in  his  first  book  upon  tlie 
Feast  of  Passover,  1.  c.  p.  13),  there  reported  as  coming  from  the  lips  of  Christ:  ovkcti  (piiyo- 
iiai  ra  irnax"  (surely  Luke,  xxii.,  16,  cannot  be  meant) ;  as  if  Chi-ist  had  predicted  that  he 
"would  no  more  eat  of  the  Paschal  lamb,  and  hence  not  live  to  see  another  Feast  of  Pass- 
over." 

*  I  cannot  sec  a  miracle  in  this  ;  it  cannot  be  shown  that  Luke  (xxii.,  13)  means  to  nar- 
rate it  as  miraculous. 

t  John  does  not  describe  the  institution  of  the  Eucharist:  it  was  known  and  commetn- 
orated  in  the  Church  regularly ;  but  the  irashiuf^  effect,  not  preserved  by  any  such  com- 
memoration, he  g^ves  in  detail,  as  an  especially  marked  incident. 

t  Cf.  p.  352,  on  Luke,  xxii.,  26,  27.  I  cannot  assert,  with  Gfiirer,  that  this  passage  is 
unmeaning,  unless  interpreted  in  view  of  the  symbolic  act:  the  word  Siaxorui',  might  apply 
to  his  wJiolc  life,  as  devoted  to  the  service  of  others  (cf.  Matt.,  xx.,  2H).  But  the  fonn  of 
the  passage  in  Luke  certainly  appears  to  imply  an  allusion  to  the  symbolic  act  which  John 
records.    The  thought  contained  in  it  is  the  same  as  that  in  John,  xiii.,  13-16. 


THE  BETRAYER.  387 

<3ost  thou  wash  my  feet  ?"  Even  when  Christ  told  him,  in  view  of  this 
reluctance,  that  he  should  know  the  import  of  the  act  thereafter,  he 
was  not  satisfied  ;  until,  at  last,  the  Saviour  rebuked  his  self-will  with 
the  declaration,  ''  If  I  wash  thee  not,  thou  hast  no  part  in  meT  And 
this  was  to  be  taken  literally,  for  this  single  case  was  a  test  of  the  state 
of  heart  essential  for  union  with  Christ :  it  was  necessary  for  Peter  to 
show  forth  a  complete  renunciation  of  his  own  will,  and  absolute  sub- 
jection to  that  of  Jesus.  But  the  sj)iritiial  meaning  afterward  set  forth 
by  Christ,  viz.,  that  none  could  enter  or  remain  in  his  communion 
unless  spiritually  purified  through  him,  was  pi'obably  implied  also  in 
these  words.  Peter,  alarmed,  cries  out,  "Yea,  if  it  be  so,  Lord,  not 
my  feet  alone,  but  also  my  hands  and  viy  JicadJ"  To  this  Christ  re- 
plied :  "  That  is  too  much  :  he  that  is  washed  (bathed)  necdeth  not  save 
to  wash  his  feet,  hut  is  clean  every  whit."  (A  figure  taken  from  East- 
ern usage  :  he  that  is  already  bathed,  need  only,  on  coming  in  from 
the  road,  wash  off  the  soil  that  may  have  gathered  on  his  feet.)  The 
spiritual  import,  then,  of  the  symbolical  act,  and  of  Christ's  language 
in  regard  to  it,  probably  is  :  Whosoever,  through  faith  in  me,  has  re- 
ceived the  purifying  principle  of  life,  who  is  pure  in  heart  and  mo- 
tives, needs  only  thereafter  continued  purification  from  sins  cleaving  to 
him  outwardly ;  just  as  the  Apostles,  though  inspired  by  pure  love  to 
Christ,  still  stood  in  need  of  the  power  of  this  animating  love,  to  cleanse 
and  purify  their  mode  of  thought. 

§  267.  The  Words  of  Christ  with  and  concerning  his  Betrayer.  (John, 
xiii.,  11,  21,  seq.) 

To  the  Apostles  he  said,  in  the  sense  above  defined,  "  Ye  are  cleun;^* 
but,  as  this  could  not  be  applied  to  Judas,  he  added,  "yet  not  all.''' 
Intimations  of  this  kind  he  threw  out  more  and  more  frequently,  partly, 
as  he  himself  said  (v.  19),  to  prepare  them  for  the  act  of  treachery, 
that  it  might  not  take  them  unawares,  and  lead  them  to  infer  that  He, 
too,  had  been  deceived  ;  and  partly,  perhaps,  in  order  to  rouse,  if  pos- 
sible, the  conscience  of  Judas  himself.  But  his  foresight  of  the  awful 
deed — tl^at  one  who  had  been  a  special  object  of  his  love  should  dis- 
arm him  and  become  a  tool  of  his  enemies — and  of  the  conflict  with 
depravity  that  he  must  go  through,  even  up  to  his  last  hour,  moved 
him  most  deeply;  and  he  now  spoke  more  plainly,  "Verily  I  say  vnto 
you,  that  one  of  you  shall  hetray  me." 

The  disciples,  not  yet  able  to  understand  him,  looked  upon  each 
other,  surprised  and  confounded.  All  were  anxious  to  know  whom  he 
alluded  to ;  but  Peter  alone,  as  usual,  gave  expression  to  the  wish. 
Even  he  did  not  venture  to  ask  aloud,  but  beckoned  to  John,  who  was 
leaning  upon  the  Saviour's  breast,  as  they  surrounded  the  table,  that 
he  should  put  the  question.     In  answer  to  John,  Christ  said,  in  a  low 


388  THE  LAST  SUPPER. 

tone,  that  it  was  he  whose  turn  it  just  then  was  to  receive  from  his 
hands  the  morsel  of  the  lamb  dipped  in  the  sauce.  And  this  was 
Judas.* 

This  occunence  could  not  fail  either  to  awaken  the  slumbering  con 
science  of  Judas,  or  to  make  him  anxious  to  leave  such  a  fellowship 
and  take  the  last  step  of  his  crime.  When  he  arose,  Christ  said  to 
him,  ''■That  tJtou  docst  (hast  resolved  to  do),  do  quickly"  Not  imply- 
ing a  command  to  commit  the  deed,  but  rather  calculated  to  move  his 
conscience,  had  it  been  still  susceptible  of  impression.  But  he  had 
decided  uj^on  the  act :  so  far  as  his  intentions  could  go,  it  was  as  good 
as  done ;  and  therefore  Christ  asked  him  to  hasten  the  crisis.t 

The  departure  of  Judas  to  inform  the  Sanhedrim  how  they  might 
most  readily  seize  the  person  of  Jesus,  decided  his  death  ;  and,  in  view 
of  it,  he  said,  "  Noiv  is  the  Son  of  Man  glorified  (in  reference  to  the 
sacrifice  of  his  earthly  life,  because  the  ideal  of  holiness  is  realized  in 
Him  under  the  last  struggles,  because  human  nature  attains  therein  its 
highest  moral  perfection),  and  God  is  glorified  in  him  (as  the  moral 
glorifying  of  human  nature  is  the  perfect  glorifying  of  God  in  it ;  the 
perfect  manifestation  of  God  in  his  holiness  and  love).  If  God  he  glo- 
rified in  him,  God  shall  also  glorify  him  in  himself  \  (shall  raise  him  to 
Himself,  and  glorify  him),  and  shall  straightway  glorify  him.''''^ 

§  268.    The  Institution  of  the  Eucharist.     (Luke,  xxii.,  17-20.)|| 
The  description  of  the  institution  of  the  Eucharist  given  by  Luke, 
harmonizing  with  thut  of  Paul  (1  Cor.,  xi.,  23,  seq.),  seems  to  afford 

*  According  to  Mattbew,  Judas  also  asked,  "  Is  it  I  ?"  and  Jesus  answered  in  the  affirm- 
ative. This  incident  would  come  in  most  naturally  at  this  point.  Judas,  noticing  the 
alarmed  countenances  of  the  disciples,  seeing  Peter  whisper  to  John,  John  to  Jesus,  and  , 
Jesus  replj',  felt  that  ho  was  discovered,  and  was  led  to  ask  the  question  directly.  This 
must  certainly  have  been  done  in  an  under  tone,  if  Judas  could  have  had  a  position  near 
enough. 

t  An  allusion  to  the  severer  struggles  that  yet  awaited  Cln-ist:  not  expressly  mentioned 
by  John,  but  related  by  the  other  Evangelists. 

t  The  expressions  h  avrw  and  ev  lavrip  (John,  xiii.,  30)  obviously  correspond  to  each 
other.  As  the  first  betokens  the  glorifying  of  God  in  Jesus,  as  the  Sou  of  Man,  so  the  sec- 
ond denotes  the  glorifying  of  the  Son  of  Man  in  God,  by  his  being  raised  up  unto  God  in 
lieaven. 

$  We  presuppose  that  Jesus  wished  Judas  to  depart  before  he  should  institute  the 
Lord's  Supper.  As  the  words  in  verses  31,  32  were  directly  connected  with  the  departure 
of  the  betrayer,  they  too  must  have  been  uttered  before  the  institution. 

II  As  John  does  not  give  an  account  of  the  institution  of  the  Eucharist,  there  is  some  diffi- 
culty in  deciding  precisely  at  what  point  of  his  nairative  (ch.  xiii.)  it  should  be  inserted. 
It  was  stated  in  the  last  note  that  v.  31,  32  were  connected  directly  with  the  departure  of 
Judas,  and  it  seems  to  us  that  the  proper  point  of  juncture  for  the  account  in  question  is 
between  v.  32  and  33.  The  words  h'To\!t  Katvi),  commencing  v.  34,  connect  very  well,  it  is 
true,  with  the  objects  of  tlie  institution  ;  but  still,  if  v.  33  was  uttered  before  the  institation, 
it  seems  strange  that  Peter's  question  (v.  36),  obviously  referring  to  v.  33,  should  have  been 


THE  INSTITUTION  OF  THE  EUCHARIST.  369 

us  the  most  clear  and  natural  view  of  the  transaction.  It  is  dis- 
tinguished from  those  of  Matthew  and  Mark  in  stating  definitely  that 
the  giving  of  the  bread  was  separated  by  a  certain  interval  from  that 
of  the  wine  ;  the  former  occurring  during  the  supper,  the  latter  after  it. 
It  is  introduced  by  the  following  words  of  Christ :  "  I  have  hcarl'dij 
desired  to  eat  this  Passover  with  you  before  I  suffer  ;  for  J  say  unto  you^ 
I  will  not  any  more  eat  thereof  until  it  he  fulfilled  in  the  kingdom  of 
God''''  ii.  e.,  until,  in  the  consummation  of  the  kingdom,  he  should  cele- 
brate with  them  the  higher  and  true  Passover  Supper).  After  these 
words  of  farewell,  he  takes  the  cup  of  red  wine,  blesses  it,  sends  it 
round,  and  reminds  them  that  he  should  no  more  drink  of  the  fruit  of 
the  vine  until  he  should  partake  with  them  of  a  higher  wine  in  the 
kingdom  of  God.  After  thus  vividly  impressing  them  with  his  de- 
parture, and  preparing  them  for  the  institution  of  a  rite  in  its  com- 
memoration, he  breaks  one  of  the  loaves,  and  divides  it  among  them, 
showing  them  that  the  broken  bread  was  to  represent  his  body,  given 
Tip  for  them ;  and  this  they  were  to  repeat  in  remembrance  of  him. 
Then;  after  the  conclusion  of  the  meal,  he  sends  round  the  cup  again, 
and  tells  them  that  the  wine  is  to  represent  his  blood,  about  to  be  shed 
for  them.     Each  of  these  acts,  therefore — the  giving  of  the  bread  and 

put  after  the  intervention  of  that  solemn  act,  which  must  have  dravs^n  the  attention  of  the  . 
disciples  so  sti-ongly.  We  consider,  then,  that  v.  33  was  spoken  ofler  the  institution. 
Strauss  (St*"-  Aafl.,  p.  449)  objects  to  this  collocation,  as  arbitrarily  severing  the  words 
eiiOis  io\datt  avrdv  (v.  32)  from  hi  niKpov  /leO'  {iftdv  diii  (v.  33).  I  cannot  see  the  force  of  the 
objection.  The  pause  after  v.  32  is  natural ;  and  then  follows  the  solemn  symbolical  act,  in 
which  Christ  sets  before  the  disciples  his  departure  from  the  earth,  and  gives  them  a 
pledge  of  communion  with  him — a  communion  to  endure  after  his  ascension  to  his  glory. 
Then  v.  33  opens  a  new  beginning  precisely  adapted  to  the  import  of  the  symbolical  act. 

The  aptness  with  which  the  account  of  the  institution  can  be  here  fitted  to  .John's  narra- 
tive, and  its  admirable  adaptation  to  the  last  discourses  of  Christ,  as  recorded  by  him, 
shows  that  was  one  of  the  links,  and  a  most  important  one,  in  the  chain  of  Christ's  last 
acts.  Gfrorer  seeks  to  prove,  however,  from  John's  omission  to  mention  the  institution, 
that  although  Christ  may  have  spoken  at  the  Last  Supper  the  words  ascribed  to  him,  they 
were  words  spoken  by  the  waj',  and  not  intended  to  establish  such  a  commemorative  rite 
as  that  which  was  afterward  founded  upon  them ;  just  as  a  deeper  signilication  was  found 
in  other  expressions  of  Christ  after  his  departure  than  was  manifest  before  ;  and  that, 
therefore,  John  omitted  them,  as  he  did  so  many  other  things  comparatively  unimportant. 
This  hypothesis  contradicts  itself.  Even  Gfrorer  must  presuppose  that  John  personally 
knew  and  partook  of  the  Eucharist  before  writing  his  Gospel ;  and  it  must  be  presupposed 
just  as  certainly,  that  it  was  at  that  time  connected  with  these  words  of  Christ;  and  that 
John,  who  certainly  was  not  inclined  to  attribute  a  less  meaning  than  others  to  Christ'.s 
sayings  at  the  Last  Supper,  must  have  conceived  the  words  to  be  so  connected.  On 
purely  psychological  grounds,  therefore,  John's  omission  cannot  be  explained  in  this  way. 
In  a  word,  no  one  having  an  intuition  of  Christ,  and  conceiving  his  solemn  state  of  mind 
at  that  Last  Supper,  can  believe  that  he  uttered  those  solemn  words  without  a  deeper  and 
more  earnest  meaning.  As  for  the  hypothesis,  recently  revived,  of  an  influence  exerted  by 
Essenixm  upon  Christian  culture,  it  is  wholly  destitute  of  historical  foundation  (cf.  p.  37, 
seq.) ;  the  derivation  of  the  Agapw  from  the  common  repasts  of  the  Essenes  is  wholly  au 
invention  of  fancy.  It  is  altogether  unhistorical  to  seek  an  external  origin  for  a  usage  that 
can  be  naturally  explained  from  internal  grounds,  as  the  origin  of  the  celebration  of  the 
Eucharist  from  an  imitation  of  Christ's  Last  Supper  with  his  disciples. 


390  THE  LASf  SUPPER. 

the  giving  of  the  wine — denotes  the  same  thing,  viz.,  the  remembrance 
of  the  Last  Supper.  Each  had  its  signification  separately;  but  the 
repetition,  during  the  meal  and  after  it,  served  to  impress  the  sym- 
bolical meaning  of  the  act  still  more  deeply  upon  the  minds  of  the  dis- 
ciples. 

The  giving  of  thanks  before  the  distribution  of  the  bread  and  wine 
corresponds  to  a  similar  act  on  the  part  of  the  head  of  the  family  in  the 
Jewish  Passover  feast,  in  which  thanksgiving  was  offered  for  the  gifts 
of  nature,  and  also  for  the  deliverance  of  the  fathers  out  of  Egypt  and 
the  founding  of  the  old  covenant ;  we  may  infer,  therefore,  that  Christ's 
thanksgiving  had  reference  partly  to  the  creation  of  all  material  things 
for  man  (bread  and  wine  symbolizing  all  God's  gifts  in  nature) ;  partly, 
and  indeed  chiefly,  to  his  own  death,  in  order  to  deliver  men  from  the 
bondage  of  sin,  and,  by  his  redemptive  act,  to  establish  the  neiv  cove- 
nant between  God  and  man.* 

As  to  the  words  used  in  the  distribution,  "  This  is  my  body;"  and, 
"  This  is  my  blood,"  it  is  impossible  that  any  of  the  recipients  at  that 
time  could  have  supposed  them  to  be  literally  meant ;  as  he  was  then 
before  them  in  his  corporeal  presence.  Had  he  intended  to  present  so 
new  and  extraordinary  a  sense  to  their  minds,  he  could  not  but  have 
stated  it  more  definitely ;  and  had  they  so  understood  him,  the  diffi- 
culty would  assuredly  have  led  them  to  question  him  further.  But  as 
the  whole  transaction — the  institution,  at  the  close  of  a  farewell  sup- 
per, of  a  visible  sign  of  communion  to  endure  after  his  departure — 
had  a  symbolical  character,  they  would  have  interpreted  these  tcords 
also  unnaturally,  if  they  had  understood  them  literally,  and  not  sym- 
bolically. "  This  is,  for  you,  my  body  and  blood ;  i.  e.,  represents  to 
you  my  body  and  blood."  The  breaking  of  the  bread  was  a  natural 
symbol  of  the  breaking  of  his  body ;  the  pouring  out  of  the  red  wine 
(the  ordinary  wine  of  Palestine)  was  a  natural  symbol  of  the  pouring 
out  of  his  blood.  "  I  offer  up  my  life  for  your  redemption  ;  and  when, 
in  remembrance  thereof,  you  meet  again  to  partake  of  this  supper,  be 
assured  that  I  shall  then  be  with  you  as  truly  as  now  I  am  with  you, 
visibly  and  coi'poreally,  in  body  and  blood.  The  bread  and  wine, 
which  I  now  divide  among  you  as  symbols  of  my  body  and  blood,  will 
then  stand  in  stead  of  my  corporeal  presence." 

It  may  be  added,  that  this  symbol  was  not  an  entirely  new  one  to 
the  disciples  :  it  had  been  used  substantially,  in  the  conversation  before 
referred  to  (p.  267,  seij.)  between  Christ  and  the  Jews,  in  the  syna- 

•  The  gifts  of  natare  and  of  redemption  are  inseparable ;  redemption  alone  has  re- 
established the  original  relation  between  man  and  nature-  Only  when  man  is  restored  to 
oommunion  with  God  is  he  assured  that  all  natare  exists  for  his  good,  to  be  asod  by  hira 

tor  the  glory  of  God. 


THE  NEW  COMMANDMENT.  391 

gogue  at  Capernaum.  To  "  eat  his  flesh  and  drink  his  blood"  was  an 
understood  sign  of  the  closest  spiritua:l  communion  with  his  Divine- 
human  nature.  And  therefore  he  said,  in  giving  the  wine,  "  This  is 
my  blood,  the  seal  of  the  new  covenant,  which  is  given  for  many  for 
the  remission  of  sins."* 


CHAPTER  III. 

CHRIST'S  LAST  DISCOURSES  WITH  HIS  DISCIPLES. 

§  269.    The  Neiv  Commandment.     (John,  xiii.,  33-35.) 

AFTER  Christ,  in  taking  leave  of  his  own,  had  given  them  the 
symbol  and  pledge  of  continued  communion,  he  said  to  them,  in 
the  familiar  style  of  a  father  to  his  family,  "  Little  children,  yet  a  little 
while  I  am  with  you,  and,  as  I  said  unto  the  Jews,  '  whither  I  go  ye 
cannot  come,'  so  note  I  say  unto  you.\  A  neio  commandment ^give  I 
unto  you,  that  ye  love  one  another  ;  as  I  have  loved  you,  that  ye  also 
love  one  another.  By  this  shall  all  men  hnow  that  ye  are  my  disciples, 
if  ye  love  one  another."  The  commandment  of  love  is  here  called  a 
new  one,  because  it  was  the  characteristic  of  the  new  covenant,  in  view 
of  which  the  Lord's  Supper  had  just  been  instituted,  and  which  he 
Was  then  about  to  seal  with  his  sufferings.  It  is  true,  the  all-compre- 
hending commandment,  to  "  love  God  supremely,  and  one's  neighbour 
as  one's  self,"  was  contained  in  the  old  covenant ;  but  it  became  a  nevj 
one,  by  its  reference  to  the  sacrifice  of  Christ,  which  expressed  its  es- 
sence :  it  demanded  a  love,  willing,  after  His  example,  to  sacrifice 
every  thing  for  the  brethren — the  spirit  of  love,  in  a  word,  which  was 
to  be  the  soul  of  the  new  congregation  of  God,  proceeding,  of  itself, 
from  communion  with  him  and  intuition  of  his  image.     It  was  new, 

*  It  has  been  disputed  whether  the  words  "for  the  remission  of  sins"  were  really  added 
by  Christ.  But  the  import  of  the  words  of  consecration  is  fully  complete  without  them. 
The  founding  of  the  7u:w  covcnarii  (which  none  will  deny  to  have  been  embraced  in  the 
words  of  consecration ;  Paul  gives  it  so,  as  well  as  Luke,  and  they  must  have  received 
them  from  ear-witnesses)  covers  the  whole  ground.  The  "new  covenant,"  founded  upon 
the  self-offering  of  Christ,  could  only  refer  to  the  new  relation  between  man  and  God,  se- 
cured by  that  self-sacrifice ;  viz.,  the  pardon  of  sin  through  his  sufferings,  and  the  restora- 
tion of  communion  with  God,  which  the  old  covenant  could  not  restore.  The  whole  import 
of  Christianity,  in  relation  to  the  old  covenant,  is  clearly  set  forth  in  that  of  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per, as  given  by  Christ  himself. 

t  In  a  different  sense,  however,  from  that  in  which  it  was  said  to  the  Jews :  the  latter 
were  to  remain  separated  from  him  in  spirit  and  disposition,  but  to  the  disciples  he  had 
given  a  pledge  of  continued  communion — the  Supper  of  the  new  covenant.  He  then  pro- 
ceeds to  give  them  the  commandment  of  the  new  covenant,  the  law  of  love,  embracing  all 
others,  by  which  the  inward  and  spiritual  communion  was  to  be  outwardly  manifested. 


392  CHRIST'S  LAST  DISCOURSES. 

also,  with  respect  to  the  earlier  stages  of  the  disciples'  association  with 
him  :  it  was  only  when  his  death  was  at  hand  that  he  could  set  it  vividly 
before  them  in  this  sense. 

§  270.  The  Request  of  JPeter. —  Christ  predicts  Peter's  Denial  of  Him. 
(John,  xiii.,  36-38.) 
So  strongly  were  the  disciples  wedded  to  their  earlier  ideas  and 
expectations,  that  it  seemed  impossible  to  make  them  realize  the  ap- 
proaching departure  of  Christ.  Peter,  alarmed  at  his  words,  inquired, 
"  Lord,  whither  goest  thou  ?'"  Jesus,  in  reply,  explained  the  sense  of 
his  words,  at  the  same  time  intimating  that  Peter  should  be  able,  at  a 
later  period,  though  he  then  was  not,  to  follow  the  Master  through  suf- 
fering :  "  Whither  I  go  thou  canst  not  follow  me  now,  hut  thou  shalt  fol- 
low me  afterward^  Peter,  ever  rash  and  self-confident,  was  not  sat- 
isfied to  wait  for  the  future :  believing  himself  then  able,  he  asked, 
"  hard,  ichy  can  I  not  follow  thee  noio  1  I  will  lay  down  viy  life  for 
thy  sahe." 

Christ  then  predicted  his  three-fold  denial — the  punishment  of  his 
froward  self-confidence  :  "  Wilt  thou  lay  down  thy  life  for  my  sake  ? 
The  colli  shall  not  crow  till  thou  hast  denied  me  thrice."* 

§  271.  Christ  predicts  the  Danger  of  tlic  Discijles  in  their  neic  Relations 
to  the  People.     (Luke,  xxii.,  35-38. )t 

Certain  fragments  of  Christ's  conversation  at  the  table  are  preserved 
to  us  in  the  first  three  Gospels,  not  given  by  John,  whose  object  was 
to  record  those  profound  and  connected  discourses  which  so  strikingly 
exhibited  the  loftiness  of  his  Divinity,  his  heavenly  calmness  and 
serenity  of  soul.  Among  these  fragments  are  contained  intimations,  in 
a  variety  of  forms,  of  the  great  change  in  their  condition  that  was  at 
hand.  Reiteration  and  emphasis  were  necessary  to  break  away  their 
stubborn  prejudices. 

Reminding  them  of  the  first  trial  mission|  on  which  he  had  sent  them, 
with  express  directions  to  provide  nothing  for  their  journey,  he  asked 
whether  they  had  then  lacked  any  thing ;  and  they  said.  Nothing.     In 

*  The  agreement  of  three  independent  accounts — Matthew,  Luke,  and  John — in  stating 
this  remarkable  incident,  confirms  its  credibility.  In  John's  Gospel,  it  is  presented  iu  an 
obvious  connexion;  in  the  other  two,  as  an  isolated  fact. 

t  GJrorcr  asserts  (Heilig.  Sage,  i.,  336)  that  this  passage  was  of  later  origin,  and  sup- 
ports his  assertion  on  the  ground  that  the  connexion  of  thought  between  verses  36  and  37 
is  false.  Not  so:  verse  37  contains  the  ground  of  the  change  in  the  disciples'  condition, 
recited  in  verse  36 ;  the  execution  of  Christ  as  a  transgressor,  making  him  an  object  of 
aversion  and  disgust,  was  to  react  upon  the  condition  of  his  followers.  Zt  is  said,  furtlicr, 
that  the  passage  was  inserted  bore  because  men  stumbled  at  Peter's  conduct,  as  recited 
in  verse  50.  But  it  would  be  a  strange  way  to  get  rid  of  /his  difRctilty,  to  introduce  a 
greater  one,  viz.,  an  advice  on  the  part  of  Jesus  himself  to  his  disciples,  to  provide  swords 
above  all  things.  t  <-'f.  p.  'J57,  seq. 


INSTRUCTION  TO  THE  DISCIPLES.  393 

that  mission,  they  found  the  people  of  Galilee  favourably  disposed  ;  no 
open  hostility  had  been  excited  against  Jesus  ;  on  the  contrary,  the 
fame  of  his  actions  inclined  the  people  to  acknowledge  him,  at  least, 
as  a  man  endowed  with  Divine  powers.  But  noiv  his  own  fate,  and 
the  consequent  change  of  popular  feeUng,  was  about  to  react  upon  the 
disciples.  Accordingly,  he  gave  them— not  rules  for  a  new  mode  of 
life  and  conduct,  but— a  striking  illustration,  in  figurative  terms,  not 
•mly  of  his  own  sufferings,  but  of  the  dangers  that  awaited  them,  from 
the  sudden  reflux  of  the  popular  feeling.  The  figures  chosen  were 
directly  antithetical  to  those  employed  on  the  former  occasion.  "  If 
I  formerly  bade  you  travel  without  purse,  or  scrip,  or  shoes  (without 
provisions  for  the  journey,  as  your  wants  would  all  be  supplied) ;  so 
n.ow,  on  the  contrary,  I  tell  you  that  you  shall  find  men  differently  dis- 
posed towards  you.  He  that  hath  a  purse,  let  him  take  it,  and  like- 
wise his  scrip  (all  the  necessaries  of  travel) ;  and  he  that  hath  no  purse* 
(money),  let  him  sell  his  garment  and  buy  a  sword"  (or  knife).  As  if 
he  had  said,  "  You  will  hereafter  need  to  care  more  for  the  safety  of 
your  lives  than  of  your  garments ;  you  will  need,  more  than  all  things 
else,  means  to  carry  you  safely  through  the  difficulties  that  will  sur- 
round you." 

The  whole  connexion  of  these  words  taught  the  disciples  that  they 
were  to  be  taken,  not  literally,  but  as  the  symbolical  veil  of  a  general 
thought.  And  they  could  easily  have  gathered  from  Christ's  example, 
from  the  spirit  of  his  whole  life,  and  from  his  teaching,  in  the  Sermon 
on  the  Mount  and  elsewhere  (if  they  were  not  utterly  thoughtless  hear- 
ers), that  he  could  not  really  intend  to  bid  them  furnish  themselves  with 

swords. 

From  this  change  in  the  feelings  of  the  world  towards  his  disciples 
Christ  naturally  passed  to  his  own  fate,  which  was  to  cause  that  change 
itself.  He  told  them  that  he  was  "  to  be  reckoned  among  transgres- 
sors" as  an  object  of  hatred  and  abhorrence.  Then  said  two  of  the 
disciples,  "Behold,  Lord!  two  of  us  are  already  provided  with 
swords."t  Language  implying  an  utter  misunderstanding  of  what  he 
had  said ;  a  misunderstanding  hardly  to  be  expected  in  men  who  had 
so  long  enjoyed  the  Saviour's  personal  society.  But,  perhaps,  in  jus- 
tice to'the  disciples,  we  ought  to  suppose  that  their  words  were  uttered 
in  the  confusion  and  distress  of  mind  which  his  declarations  occasioned. 
Perhaps  Peter,  the  most  hasty  and  headlong  of  the  Apostles,  who  car- 
ried a  sword,  was  one  of  the  speakers.  It  was  well  that  this  misun- 
derstanding was  expressed,  to  be  checked  and  done  away.  '' It  is 
enough:'  said  Christ,  plainly  showing  that  he  had  not  the  slightest  in- 

*  The  antithesis  is  between  5  ix<^v  liaUvnov  and  h  ,ifi  txuv. 

t  The  word  may  be  rendered  "knives;"  and  these  were  iti  common  use  among  travel- 
lers in  those  regions  for  a  variety  of  purposes. 


394  CHRIST'S  LAST  DISCOURSES. 

tention  to  advise  the  use  of  weapons  of  defence,  as  two  swords  among 
them  would  have  been  nothing  for  that  purpose.  Perhaps,  however, 
the  phrase  might  be  more  correctly  rendered,  '■^enough  of  it ;''''  i.  e.,  a 
sign  to  drop  the  subject;  as  if  a  reproof  of  their  tendency  to  stick  to 
the  words  and  literal  features  of  his  language,  rather  than  to  its  spirit 
and  sense. 

§  272.    Christ  consoles  the  Disciples  with  the  Promise  of  his  Return. 

(John,  xiv.) 

The  last  connected  discourses  of  Christ  are  given  at  length  in  John's 
Gospel.*  In  these  he  made  use  of  a  different  turn  of  thought  from 
that  above  referred  to,  to  prepare  the  minds  and  hearts  of  the  disci- 
ples for  the  struggles  that  awaited  them.  In  view  of  their  evident  dis- 
tress, while  yet  sitting  at  the  table,  he  said,  "  Let  not  your  hearts  be 
troubled ;  trust  in  God,  and  confide  in  Me."  Even  when  his  visible 
presence  should  be  removed,  they  were  to  trust  in  him  as  the  Mediator 
of  their  communion  with  God ;  nor,  in  grief  for  his  departure,  to  think 
that  he  had  left  them  alone  in  the  world.     There  would  be  mansions 

*  It  is  charged  by  some  that  John  could  not  possibly  have  remembered  these  discourses 
thus  amid  the  thousand  painful  and  tumultuous  emotions  that  must  have  immediately  fol- 
lowed. Little  do  such  objectors  conceive  of  the  nature  of  the  human  soul,  and  of  the 
might  of  deep  impressions  upon  it.  Such  impressions  these  discourses  must  have  made 
upon  a  mind  and  heart  like  John's,  and  what  was  once  received  thus  into  the  depths  of  the 
soul  no  concussions  could  cast  out.  Moreover,  these  emotions,  how  powerful  soever  they 
may  have  been,  lasted  but  for  a  few  days,  and  wore  followed  by  a  reunion  with  Christ,  by 
a  new  epoch  of  the  interior  life  of  the  disciples  which  developed  itself  more  and  more 
gloriously.  How,  in  these  few  days,  could  John  have  forgotten  discourses  so  weighty  in 
themselves,  and  afiFecting  liis  own  soul  so  powerfully  ?  And,  when  the  spiritual  life  of  the 
disciples,  sunken  for  a  moment,  emerged  again  after  the  resurrection  of  their  Master,  hovr 
brilliantly  must  the  image  of  these  last  discourses  have  shone  forth  from  the  depths  of  their 
memories  and  their  hearts!  How  precious  must  each  word  have  been  to  them!  With 
what  intense  interest  must  they  have  turned  them  over  and  dwelt  upon  their  import ! 
And  how  clear,  in  the  light  of  their  experience  of  the  fulfilment  of  bis  predictions,  must 
many  things  have  appeared  that  were  before  obscure ! 

Equally  futile  is  the  objection  that  John  wrote  his  Gospel  at  an  advanced  age,  when 
some  things  must  have  escaped  his  memory^  and  others  become  blended  with  his  own 
thoughts.  He  must  have  repeated  these  discourses,  times  without  number,  to  others  ;  how, 
then,  can  it  be  said  that  he  could  not  commit  them  faithfully  to  writing  ?  (we  do  not  mean 
to  say  verhalbn  ct  literatim,  cf.  index,  sub  voc.  Jolin).  The  remark  of  Irenaeus  with  regard 
to  what  he  had  heard  in  his  youth  from  the  lips  of  Polycarp  will  apply  with  vastly  greater 
force  to  John  and  Christ  :  "MaWov  yiip  ra  rdre  Siai^vijiioveuui  twv  tiajxos  ytvoiiiviav,  ai  yitp  ix 
vaiiiov  itaOi'iacti  avvavlovaat  t^  ^'uxWi  ^vovvtm  airfj."  (Comp.  the  entire  passage,  Euseb.,  v. 
20  ;  it  bears  remarkably  against  human  efforts  to  convert  a  historical  period  into  a  mythi- 
cal one.) 

John  could  not  have  been  Jukn  had  it  been  possible  for  him  to  forget  such  discourses  of 
Christ. 

A  further  proof  of  the  originality  of  these  discourses,  as  recorded  by  John,  is  the  aptness 
with  which  many  passages  art;  joined  into  them  which,  in  the  other  Gospels,  are  presented 
in  isolated  forms,  or  in  inapt  connexions  ;  c.  g.,  Luke,  xii.,  U,  12  ;  Matt.,  x.,  17-20;  Mark 
xiii.,  11.  The  passage  in  Jolin,  xvi.,  32,  ia  connected  in  Matt.,  xxvi.,  31,  Mark,  xiv.,  27, 
with  the  account  of  Peters  denial. 


PHILIP  AND  THOMAS.  395 

for  all,  he  told  them,  in  his  Father's  house.  He  was  going  before  (it 
was  the  object  of  his  redeeming  sufferings  and  of  his  ascension  to  heav- 
en), to  prepare  a  place  for  them  ;  just  as  a  friend  goes  before  his  friend 
to  make  his  dwelling  ready.  And  then  he  promises  them,  "  If  I  go 
and  prepare  a  place  for  you,  I  will  come  again  and  receive  you  unto  my- 
self;  that  where  I  ain,  there  ye  may  be  also." 

This  might  be  upderstood  of  Christ's  second  advent,  were  it  not  that 
he  speaks  of  what  was  to  happen  immediately  upon  his  return  to  the 
Father,  and  that  his  design  was  to  comfort  them  in  view  of  the  imme- 
diate pain  of  separation.  Nor  can  it  be  applied  to  his  Resurrection, 
because  his  "  going  to  the  Father"  was  to  folloio  the  resurrection,  and 
this,  again,  to  be  followed  by  a  separation.*  The  only  remaining  inter- 
pretation is  to  apply  it  to  his  spiritual  coming,  to  his  revealing  himself 
again  to  them,  as  the  glorified  one,  in  the  communion  of  the  Divine 
life.  Not  only  were  they  to  follow  Him  to  the  heavenly  "  mansions,"! 
where  he  was  to  "  provide  a  place  for  them,"  but  he  himself  was 
"  again  to  come  to  them,"  that  where  He  was,  there  they  might  be  also, 
in  spirit,  united  with  him,  never  again  to  be  separated.  But  as  they 
could  not  as  yet  fully  apprehend  this  spiritual  coming  and  communion, 
it  was  only  at  a  later  period  that  these  expressions,  sufficiently  within 
their  capacity  to  give  them  consolation  at  the  time,  were  understood  in 
their  full  import. 

§  273.    Conversation  with  Philip  arid  Thomas. —  Christ  the  Way. 
(John,  xiv.) 

The  institution  of  the  Eucharist  also  contained  an  allusion|  to  the 
promise  that  he  would  be  with  his  disciples  as  truly  after  his  departure 
as  he  had  been  during  his  coi-poreal  presence.  And  as  he  knew  that 
tlieir  minds  were  not  yet  entirely  free  from  carnal  and  unspiritual 
views,  he  gave  occasion  for  them  to  express  themselves  freely,  in 
order  to  give  them  clearer  ideas  by  means  of  their  very  misunder- 
standings. 

'■'■  Wliithei-  I  go"  said  he,  "yc  know  ;  and  the  way  ye  know."  Still, 
the  death  of  Messiah  was  a  hard  conception  for  them ;  a  miraculous 
removal  from  the  earth  would  have  accorded  better  with  their  feelings. 

*  This  objection  would  fall  away  if  we  could  believe,  with  L.  Kinhel  (Stud.  u.  Krit., 
1841,  3),  that  Christ,  after  leaving:  the  grave  and  appearing  to  Mary,  ascended  to  heaven, 
and  only  returned  thence  when  lie  reappeared  to  the  disciples.  But  the  words  under  con- 
sideration do  not  justify  this  supposition.  However  we  may  conceive  Christ's  reappear- 
ance after  his  resurrection,  they  could  not  satisfy  the  promises,  given  in  these  discourses,  of  a 
new  and  higher  spiritual  connexion  between  him  and  his  disciples.  In  view  of  this  con- 
tirtued  manifestation,  this  uninterrupted  communion,  his  bodily  reappearance  was  only 
preparatory  and  subordinate. 

t  Compare  the  analogy  in  the  figure  of  the  "  everlasting  mansions,"  p.  275. 

t  The  last  promise,  also.  Matt.,  xxviii.,  20,  presupposes  such  fuller  explanations  as  those 
which  we  find  recorded  by  John  in  these  discourses. 


396  CHRIST-S  LAST  DISCOURSES. 

Thomas,*  who  seems  to  have  remained  in  bondage  to  sense  more  than 
any  of  the  others,  said  to  him,  '■'Lord,  we  hnoio  not  whither  thou  goest ; 
and  hoio  can  we  know  the  way  V  The  Saviour,  in  his  reply,  inverts 
the  order;  if  they  had  known  the  "way"  they  would  have  known  the 
"  ivhithcr:'"  "  I  am  the  way,  the  truth,  and  the  life  ;  no  man  cometh  unto 
the  Father  but  by  me.  Jf  ye  had  hnoicn  me,  ye  should  have  knoicn  my 
Father  also."  (Had  they  better  known  Hint,  through  whom  the  Father 
reveals  and  communicates  himself,  they  would  have  known  better  all 
the  rest.)  The  three  conceptions  in  this  passage  are  closely  connected 
together.  He  designates  himself  not  merely  as  the  guide,  but  as  the 
^Vay  itself;  and  that  because  he  is  himself,  according  to  his  nature 
and  life,  the  Truth  ;  the  truth  springing  from  the  Life  ;  because  he  is, 
in  himself,  the  Source  of  the  Divine  Life  among  men,  as  well  as  the 
personal  manifestation  of  the  Divine  Truth.  He  is,  therefore,  the  Way, 
inasmuch  as  mankind,  by  communion  of  Divine  life  with  him,  receive 
the  truth,  and  are  brought  by  it  into  union  with  the  Father.  He  that 
knows  him,  therefore,  knows  the  Father  also.  "  And  from  henceforth 
ye  know  him,  and  have  seen  him;"  i.e.,  after  their  long  intercourse 
with  Christ,  they  were  now,  at  least,  to  see  and  recognize  the  Father 
in  him. 

But  Philip,  still  on  the  stand-point  of  sense,  applied  these  words  to 
a  sensible  theophany,  as  a  sign  of  the  Messianic  era :  "  Lord,  show  us 
the  Father,  and  it  svjiceth  us."  This  misunderstanding  led  Christ 
again  to  impress  upon  their  minds  the  same  truth,  that  whoever  ob- 
tained a  just  spiritual  intuition  of  Hi7n  saw  the  Father  in  Him;  the 
Father,  with  whom  He  lived  in  inseparable  communion,  and  who 
manifested  himself  in  His  words  and  works  (v.  9,  10,  11).  But  these 
works,  and  the  manifestation  of  God  in  them,  were  not  to  remain  to 
the  disciples  something  merely  external.  Whoever  believed  on  him 
was,  through  his  fellowship,  to  become  an  organ  of  his  continued  Divine 
working  for  the  renewal  of  the  life  of  mankind ;  the  aim  of  his  whole 
manifestation  was  to  do  yet  greater  things  than  he  had  done  :t  "  Verily, 
verily,  I  say  unto  you,  he  that  believeth  on  me,  the  works  that  I  do  shall 
he  do  also  ;  and  yet  greater  works  than  these  shall  lie  do."\ 

And  the  source  of  all  this  power  was  to  be,  in  his  own  words,  "Be- 
cause I  go  unto  my  Father ;"  they  were  to  gain  it  precisely  by  that 
separation,  the  prospect  of  which  then  filled  them  with  grief  and  sorrow. 
When  he  should  go  to  the  Father,  and  remove  from  them  the  visible, 
human,  and,  therefore,  limited  form  of  his  manifestation,  as  a  source 
of  dependance,  then  would  he,  as  the  glorified  one,  work  invisibly  from 

*  Thomas  displays  the  same  character  here  as  in  his  subsequent  doubts  concerning 
Christ's  resuiTcction.  It  is  wholly  incredible  that  the  author  of  John's  Gospel,  who  obvi- 
ously was  little  capable  of  assuming  different  characters,  should  have  invented  such  a  one. 

t  Cf.  the  excellent  remarks  of /v/i«5',  Btud.  u.  Krit.,  lS3t),  iii.,  684.  +  Cf.  p.  184,  35e. 


PROMISE  OF  THE  COMFORTER.  397 

heaven  in  them,  and  among  them,  with  Divine  power.  And  there- 
fore it  was  that,  through  communion  of  the  Divine  life  witli  him,  they 
were  to  "  do  yet  greater  things  than  these." 

§  274.  Of  Prayer  in  the  Name  of  Christ.  lie  promises  the  Spirit  of 
Truth,  the  Comforter  ;  and  His  oicn  Return.  (John,  xiv.,  13-26.) 
The  disciples  were  to  enter  into  new  relations  with  Christ.  He, 
therefore,  specially  taught  them  to  pray  in  his  name.  As  they  had  be- 
fore, during  his  bodily  presence,  expressed  their  wants  to  him  person- 
ally, so  now,  trusting  in  him,  and  conscious  of  the  new  relations  in 
which,  through  him,  they  stood  to  the  Father,  they  were  to  apply  to 
the  Father  in  his  name.  "-And.  whatsoever  ye  shall  ask  of  the  Father  in 
my  name  (i.  e.,  through  his  mediation),  that  will  I  do,  that  the  Father 
may  be  glorified  in  the  Son'  (by  what  the  Son  should  work  among  men 
to  the  glory  of  the  Father,  by  the  spread  of  the  kingdom  of  God  through 
him).  At  the  same  time,  certain  conditions  were  essential  on  their 
part :  ^'  If  ye  love  me,  heep  my  commandments.''' 

And  this  forms  the  transition  to  the  promise  which  follows  :  "And  I 
will  pray  the  Father,  and  he  shall  give  you  another  Comforter,  that  he 
may  abide  loith  you  forever."  Through  his  mediation,  the  leather  would 
send  them,  instead  of  Him  who  had,  up  to  that  time,  been  their  help  in 
all  things,  another  Helper,  who  should  not  leave  them,  as  He  was  about 
to  do.  '■'Even  the  Spirit  of  Truth  :"  and  he  calls  the  Spirit  so,  because 
it  alone  can  unfold  the  meaning  of  his  truth,  and  because  union  with 
the  Holy  Spirit  can  only  be  obtained  by  appropriating  that  truth. 
This  Spirit,  he  told  them,  the  world  could  not  receive,  because  it  was 
totally  foreign  to  the  world ;  but  they  were  to  know  it,  in  the  only  way 
in  which  it  eould  be  known,  by  inward  and  personal  experience  :  "  He 
dwclleth  icith  you,  and  shall  be  in  you." 

His  description  of  the  Spirit  makes  it,  in  relation  to  his  own  previous 
personal  presence  among  them,  something  different  from  himself. 
This  prepared  them  to  apprehend,  in  a  more  spiritual  way  than  before, 
the  announcement  of  his  own  return,  which  he  now  repeated.  With 
this  Spirit  it  was  that  lie  himself  was  to  come  to  them  :  "  I  will  not  leave 
you  orphans  ;  I  loill  come  to  you."  He  speaks  now  of  himself,  just  as 
he  had  before  spoken  of  the  Spirit :  "  Yet  a  little  ivhile,  and  the  icorld 
seeth  me  no  more,  but  ye  see  me  ;  because  I  live,  and  ye  live ;  I  reveal 
myself,  as  the  Living,  to  the  living."  The  world,  cut  off  from  the  Di- 
vine life,  and  therefore  dead,  knows  nothing  of  Christ,  as  the  Living ; 
it  holds  him  dead ;  but  to  those  who  are  susceptible  of  Divine  com- 
munion of  life  with  him,  he  will  reveal  himself  as  the  Living  one. 

He  then  tells  them  that  only  at  the  period  when  they  should  reach 


398  CHRIST'S  LAST  DISCOURSES. 

this  higher  communion  with  him,  would  they  be  able  fully  to  under- 
stand his  relation  to  the  Father  and  to  them  :  "At  that  day  shall  ye 
know  that  I  am  in  my  Father,  and  ye  in  me,  and  I  in  you"  Through- 
out these  final  discourses,  promises  alternate  with  duties  ;  so  now  he 
points  out  an  essential  requisite  on  their  part — love,  proved  in  keeping 
his  commandments  :  "  He  that  hath  (knows  and  presei'ves)  my  com- 
mandments, and  also  kecpeth  (faithfully  observes)  them,  he  it  is  that 
lovcth  me  ;  and  he  that  loveth  vie  shall  he  loved  of  my  Father,  and  I 
will  love  him  (including  an  active  demonstration  of  love),  aiid  will  mani- 
fist  myself  to  Jiim."  One  of  the  disciples,  yet  blinded  by  carnal  ex- 
pectations, said  to  him,  "Lord,  how  is  it  that  thou  wilt  manifist  thyself 
unto  us,  and  not  unto  the  world  V  This  led  Christ  to  sq,^"  that  this  mani- 
festation spoken  of  would  be  made  only  to  those  who  should  be  spirit- 
ually susceptible  of  it,  thereby  implying  that  it  would  be  entirely  a 
spiritual  manifestation  (v.  23,  24). 

Finally,  he  referred  them  again  (v.  26)  to  the  Holy  Ghost,  to  be  sent 
through  his  mediation,  who  should  teach  them  rightly  to  understand 
his  owii  (Christ's)  doctrine ;  and  should  call  back  to  their  memories 
any  thing  which  might,  through  misunderstanding,  become  darkened  in 
their  minds. 

§  275.  Christ's  Salutation  of  Peace ;  its  Import.  (John,  xiv.,  27,  seq.) 
When  about  to  rise  from  the  table,  the  Saviour  pronounced  a  bless- 
ing, as  was  usual  at  salutation  and  leave-taking :  "  Peace  I  leave  ivith 
you,  my  peace  I  give  unto  you.'''  A  fitting  conclusion  to  the  promises 
of  comfort  was  this  farewell  word  of  peace.  But,  after  all  that  he  had 
promised,  he  could,  even  in  view  of  the  approaching  separation,  and 
the  conflicts  and  strifes  to  which  he  was  about  to  leave  the  disciples, 
promise  them  the  enjoyment  of  peace.  And  he  told  them  that  his 
salutation  implied  another  peace  than  that  of  the  world  :  "  'Not  as  the 
toorld  giveth,  give  I  unto  you.'"  This  peace  the  world  has  not,  and 
therefore  cannot  give.  It  was  peace  in  itself,  a  real  peace,  that  he  left 
behind  unto  his  own ;  a  peace  which  none  but  He  possesses,  and  none 
can  find  but  in  communion  with  him.  No  room  in  them,  therefore, 
for  fear  or  disquiet :  "  Let  not  your  heart  he  trouhled,  neither  let  it  he 
afraid'' 

Again  he  recurs  to  his  departure,  and  reminds  them  of  the  promise 
which  ought  to  remove  all  the  sting  of  separation  :  "  Ye  have  heard  how 
I  said  unto  you,  I  go  away,  and  'come  again  unto  you.  If  ye  loved  me, 
ye  rvould  rejoice  hecause  I  said,  I  go  unto  the  Father,  for  the  Father  is 
greater  than  I."  He  went ;  but  it  was  to  return  in  greater  glory. 
They  could  not  love  him,  if  they  did  not  rejoice  at  the  glorious  change  ; 
thtit  he  was  to  Icavi;  llu;  limits  of  his  earthly  and  visible  human  nature, 
and  ascend  to  the  Father  Almighty,  in  order  to  operate,  thenceforward, 


THE  VINE  AND  BRANCHES.  399 

in  union  with  Him,  in  the  power  of  God,  invisible  and  infinite.*  He 
had  foretold  to  them  what  would  happen,  that  their  faith  might  not 
waver  in  the  evil  hour  (v.  29).  He  could  speak  but  a  few  words  more, 
as  the  Prince  of  this  World  was  coming  (in  his  agents) ;  though  that 
Prince  had  no  power  over  him,  and  He  could,  if  he  chose,  escape  the 
power  of  his  foes  (v.  30)  ;  but  he  did  not  choose.  Voluntarily  he 
would  go  to  meet  death,  to  prove,  in  the  face  of  the  world,  his  love  to 
the  Father,  by  completing  the  work  committed  to  him  by  the  Father 
(v.  31). 

And  then  he  called  them  to  arise  from  table,  and  go  with  him  to  the 
final  conflict. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

DISCOURSES  OF  CHRIST  AFTER  RISING  FROM  TABLE  AT  THE  LAST 

SUPPER. 

§  276.    Similitude  of  the   Vine  and  Branches. —  The  Law  of  Lioxh. 

(John,  XV.) 

THERE  were  many  thoughts  which  his  mind  and  heart  yet  laboured 
to  pour  forth.  After  leaving  the  table  he  began  to  discourse  anew, 
and  called  their  attention  specially  to  two  thoughts:  (1.)  That  the  re- 
lation which  had  subsisted  between  them  was  to  remain,  with  this  dif- 
ference only,  that,  instead  of  external  dependence  and  connexion,  they 
would  be  internally  allied  to  and  dependent  on  him ;  (2.)  That  they 
must  now  become  self-active  agents  for  the  spread  of  the  kingdom  of 
God,  but  that  they  could  only  become  such  by  continued  communion 
and  fellowship  with  him. 

To  illustrate  these  points,  he  made  use  of  the  similitude  of  a  Vine: 
God,  the  vine-dresser ;  Christ,  the  vine ;  his  followers,  the  branches. 
The  fructifying  sap  flows  from  the  vine-stock  through  all  the  branches, 
and  without  it  they  can  produce  no  fruit ;  so  the  followers  of  Christ 
can  only  obtain,  by  inward  and  inseparable  communion  with  him,  the 
Divine  life  which  can  fit  them  to  be  productive  labourers  in  the  king- 
dom of  God.  The  branches  wither  when  torn  from  the  vine,  and  de- 
prived of  its  vital  sap  ;  so,  also,  the  disciples  of  Christ  live  and  prosper 
only  in  continuous  communion  with  him.  But  as  the  branches  show, 
by  bearing  fruit,  that  they  have  shared  in  the  fructifying  power  from  the 
vine-stock ;  so  the  disciples  of  Christ  must  show  their  participation  in 
the  Divine  life  through  communion  with  Him,  by  abundant  and  fruitful 

*  As  UlcIk  and  Kling  (loc.  cit.)  liave  remarked,  this  passage  can  only  be  applied  ta  the 
relation  between  God,  as  the  Almighty,  and  Jesus,  as  man,  standing  then  before  his  disci 
pies,  in  the  narrow  form  of  humanity. 


400  CHRIST'S  LAST  DISCOURSES. 

labours  in  the  kingdom  of  God.  The  vine-dresser  cuts  off  all  useless 
branches,  which,  like  mere  excrescences,  consume  the  vital  power  of 
the  vine  without  beanng  fruit ;  so  will  all  those  who  do  not  manifest 
the  Divine  life  in  fruitful  works,  proving,  by  this  deficiency,  that  their 
communion  with  Christ  is  not  real,  but  apparent,  be  cut  off  from  the 
kino-dora  of  God.*  But  even  the  productive  branches  stand  in  con- 
stant need  of  the  vine-dresser's  care  ;  all  exuberant  growth  must  be 
trimmed  ;  all  excrescences  hindering  the  course  of  the  vital  sap  must 
be  pared  away  ;  so,  also,  the  disciples,  even  those  who  enjoy  the  Divine 
life  in  communion  with  Christ,  must  be  purified  constantly  fiom  foreign 
elements,  that  there  may  be  rfo  obstacles  to  the  developement  of  the 
Divine  life  within  them,  or  of  the  outward  activity  corresponding  to  it. 

It  was  only  by  this  activity  in  communion  with  him  that  they  could 
prove  themselves  to  be  his  genuine  disciples  (v.  8)  ;f  by  activity  in  ob- 
serving all  his  commandments  ;|  and  again  he  condenses  all  "  the  com- 
mandments" into  love  (v.  9-14).  Such  love  they  were  to  show  to 
each  other  as  he,  laying  down  his  life,  had  shown  to  them.  In  thus 
communicating  to  the  disciples  the  whole  counsel  of  the  Father  in  re- 
gard to  the  plan  of  salvation  through  their  agency,  and  in  calling  upon 
them  to  devote  themselves  to  this  service  as  organs  of  the  Divine  king- 
dom, with  clear  consciousness  and  free  self-determination,  he  removes 
them  from  the  stand-point  of  "  servants"  and  takes  them  up  to  that  of 
"  friends"'*(v.  15).^S 

United  to  each  other  in  love,  they  must  also  be  hated  in  common  by 
the  world  ;  the  world  must  feel  to  them  as  to  their  Master.  He  pre- 
dicts the  persecutions  that  await  them.  He  sees  before  him  the  con- 
flict of  Christianity  with  all  existing  institutions  (v.  18-23). |1 

§  277.    Promise  of  the  Holy  Ghost. —  Concluding  Words  of  Comfort  to 

the  Disciples.     (John,  xvi.,  7-33.) 

But  he  further  promises^  that  in  all  their  conflict^  they  shall  have  the 

Holy  Ghost  for  a  helper.**    The  Holy  Ghost  was  to  accomplish,  through 

them,  all  things  necessary  for  the  spread  of  the  Divine  kingdom.      The 

*  The  same  thought  as  "He  who  hath,  to  him  shall  be  given,"  &c.,  p.  105,  189. 

t  Mark  the  inner  connexion  between  these  discourses  and  those  recorded  in  the  first 
three  Gospels.  The  same  demand  is  implied  in  the  parables  of  the  talents  and  the  pound 
(p.  347,  348)  as  in  this  similitude  of  the  vine. 

%  Hence  "  the  commandments"  are  not  "  the  Icttci-  of  the  law  ;"  where  there  is  life,  rooted 
in  communion  with  Christ,  it  cannot,  according  to  its  very  essence,  manifest  itself  other- 
wise except  in  works  corresponding  to  the  law.  §  Cf  p.  120. 

II  Not  "peace,"  but  a  "sword,"  as  in  the  synoptical  Gospels;  cf.  p.  315. 

%  Cf.  p.  396,  397. 

••  Cf.  p.  117,  on  the  two-fold  relation  of  the  disciples,  (1.)  As  individual  witnesses  of  Christ's 
ministry;  (2.)  As  organs  of  the  sjiirit,  like  believers  in  general. 


THE  WORK  OF  THE  SPIRIT.  401 

process  he  states  as  follows  :  The  Holy  Ghost  will  convince  the  world 
of"  sin,  and  show  that  unbelief  is  the  ground  of  sin ;  and  further,  will 
convince  the  world  that  Christ  did  not  die  as  a  sinner,  but,  as  the  Holy 
One,  ascended  to  his  Father  in  heaven,  most  perfectly  manifesting  His 
righteousness  in  his  death,  and  in  the  exaltation  to  God  which  followed 
it ;  indeed,  all  that  are  convinced  of  sin  will  recognize  him  as  the  Holy 
One,  and  the  source  of  all  holiness  in  men.  So  he  will  gradually  con- 
vince the  world  oi  judgment ;  that  Satan,  so  long  ruler  of  the  woi'ld, 
has  been  judged  ;  that  evil  has  lost  its  sway,  and  therefore  can  cause  no 
fear  to  such  as  hold  communion  with  Christ.  These,  then,  are  the 
three  great  elements  of  the  process  :  the  consciousness  of  sin  ;  of  the 
righteousness  of  Christ,  the  Redeemer  from  sin;  of  the  impotency  of 
evil  [judgment)  in  opposition  to  the  kingdom  of  Goo.  And  to  be  con- 
scious of  sin;  to  know  Christ  as  the  Holy  Redeemer;  and  the  king- 
dom of  God  as  the  conqueror  of  evil,  which  shall  finally  subdue  all 
things  to  itself:  this  is  the  whole  essence  of  Christianity. 

Christ  had  many  things  to  say  of  his  doctrine  which  the  disciples 
were  not  then  in  a  condition  to  understand.  But  he  was  just  about  to 
leave  them  ;  and  therefore  he  pointed  them  to  the  Spirit  of  Truth, 
which  was  to  unfold  all  the  truth  he  had  proclaimed.  It  was  not  to 
announce  any  new  doctrine;  but  to  open  the  truth  of  his  doctrine;  to 
glorify  Him  (v.  14)  in  them,  by  developing  the  full  sense  of  what  He 
had  taught  them.  Again  he  passes  from  the  giving  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
to  his  own  communion  with  them  ;  repeating  what  he  had  before  said : 
"  A  little  while,  and  ye  shall  not  see  me,  and  again  a  little  while,  and  ye 
shall  sec  vie,  because  I  go  to  the  Father''  (inasmuch  as  his  "going  to  the 
Father"  was  to  be  the  ground  of  the  new  spiritual  communion).*  And, 
again,  some  of  them  expressed  the  surprise  of  their  contracted  minds 
at  his  words  (v.  17).  Jesus,  seeing  their  uncertainty,  developed  the 
thouoht  still  further.  He  told  them  they  should  be  sori'owful  for  a 
season,  but  their  sorrow  would  be  turned  into  permanent  joy.  Their 
transient  pains,  like  those  of  a  woman  in  travail,  would  be  the  birth- 
throes  of  a  new  creation  within  them,  "  And  ye  now,  therefore,  have 
sorrow  •  but  I  vnW  see  you  again,  and  your  heart  shall  rejoice,  and  your 
joy  no  man  taketh  from  you." 

''And  in  that  day  ye  shall  ask  me  nothing ;'''  they  would  no  more  need 
his  sensible  presence  to  ask  of  him  as  they  had  been  wont.  "Whatso- 
ever Ve  shall  ask  the  Father  in  my  name  (in  conscious  communion 
throuo-h  Christ's  mediation),  he  will  give  it  you.'"  (The  Father  would 
reveal  all  things  needful  to  them  through  Christ's  mediation ;  clearing 
up  all  obscurities,  and  supplying  the  place  of  his  corporeal  presence.) 

*  But  the  promise  certaiuly  contains  an  allusion  to  bis  resurrection,  inasmuch  as  his  re- 
appearance was  to  the  disciples  the  point  of  transition  to  the  state  of  new  spiritual  com- 
munion. 

C  c 


402  CHRIST'S  LAST  DISCOURSES. 

Up  to  that  time  (v.  24),  not  having  yet  obtained  confidence  of  com- 
munion with  the  Father  through  Christ,  they  had  asked  nothing  of 
Him  ;  but  then  they  should  ask,  and  receive,  that  their  joy  might  bt3 
fulh  Then,  too,  v^rould  Christ  no  more  speak  unto  them  in  figures  or 
parables,  but  would  openly  unveil  all  he  had  to  say  to  them  of  the 
Father.  "  But,"  says  he,  "  I  say  not  unto  you  that  I  will  pray  the 
Father  for  you ;"  in  their  conscious  communion  with  Him  they  would 
be  sure  of  the  Father's  love,  and  in  His  name  would  address  them- 
selves directly  to  the  Father. 

At  last  a  ray  of  light  beamed  into  the  souls  of  the  disciples.  They 
felt  the  impression  of  the  high  things  which  Christ,  in  confident  Divinity, 
had  just  announced  to  them.  Yet,  as  their  language  shows*  that  they 
did  not  fully  understand  him,  it  was  rather  a  feeling  than  a  clearly 
developed  consciousness.  Christ  cautioned  them  against  trusting  it  too 
far ;  that  the  hour  was  at  hand  when  a  faith  of  this  kind  would  give 
way  to  a  powerful  impression  of  another  nature ;  that  they  should  be 
scattered,  and  leave  him  alone :  "  Yet  not  alone,''  said  he,  "  hcramc  the 
Father  is  ivith  me.''' 

The  aim  of  the  whole  discoui'se  had  been  to  impart  to  the  minds  of 
the  disciples  a  spring  of  Divine  comfort  amid  their  struggles  with  a 
hostile  world  for  the  advancement  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  He  closed 
it  with  a  few  words  of  farewell,  embracing  its  whole  scope  :  "  These 
things  have  I  sjwken  to  you,  that  in  (communion  with)  me  ye  miglit  hacc 
peace.]  In  the  tcorld  ye  shall  have  tribulations ;  he  of  good  cheer  ;  J 
have  overcome  the  world. "% 

§  278.    Christ's  Prayer  as  High-jjriest.     (John,  xvii.) 
With  a  prayer  Christ  concludes  this  last  interview  with  his  disciples  ; 
with  a  prayer  he  prepares  himself  for  the  separation  and  the  final  con- 
flict. 

The  import  of  the  prayer  is  the  same  as  that  of  the  discourse.  C<jn- 
scious  that  his  work  (viz.,  to  glorify  God  in  man)  on  earth  is  finished, 
he  prays  the  Father  to  take  him  to  himself,  and  glorify  him  with  him- 
self. Not,  however,  with  a  selfish  aim  or  selfish  longings ;  it  was  to 
o-lorify  the  Father,  and,  what  was  inseparable  therefrom,  to  impart  the 
Divine  life  to  mankind  :  "  Glorify  thy  Son,  that  thy  Son  also  ?nay  glorfy 

*  It  appears  clear  from  v.  29,  30  tliat  they  understood  the  phrase,  "  Ye  shall  '^sk  me 
nothing,"  in  a  sense  ditierent  from  that  which  he  intended.  It  may  readily  be  imagiucl 
that  John's  subsequent  better  comprehension  of  Christ's  meaning  caused  this  misappre- 
hen~%ion  to  appear  remarkable,  and  served  to  impress  it  the  more  upon  his  memoiy. 

t  Inward  peace ;  Divine  calmness  amid  the  struggle  with  the  world. 

t  The  relation  is  two-fold :  (1)  The  inward  life  in  communion  with  Christ,  who  has  over- 
come the  Power  of  Evil,  and  gives  his  own  to  share  in  his  victory ;  (2)  Tlie  outward  life  in 
contact  with  the  world,  possibly  harming,  indeed,  the  outward  man,  but  incapable  of  sub- 
duiug,  or  disturbing  the  peace  of,  the  inner  man,  rooted  in  Christ's  fellowship. 


THE  PRIESTLY  PRAYER.  403 

thee ;  as  tJiou  hast  given  him  power  over  all  flesh,  that  he  should  give 
eternal  life  to  as  many  as  thou  hast  given  him."*  But  as  eternal  life  is 
only  to  be  obtained  by  knowing  the  true  God,  revealed  in  Christ,  he 
prays  that  this  knowledge  may  be  diffused  among  all  men,  and  so  eter- 
nal life  be  given  to  all. 

Then,  first,  he  prays  for  those  who  had  already  received  this  knowl- 
edge, and  were  to  become  instruments  of  its  diffusion  among  men. 
As  he  is  about  to  leave  the  world,  and  to  leave  the  disciples  alone  in  it, 
he  commends  them  to  the  protecting  care  of  the  Father,  to  whom  they 
are  consecrated  through  him  ;  that  the  Divine  communion  of  life,  which 
he  had  established,  might  be  preserved  among  them.  He  commends 
them  to  His  care,  because  the  world,  in  whose  midst  they  are,  will 
hate  them,  since  they  are  not  of  it.  He  does  not  ask  their  remo- 
\Q\from  the  world  ;  that  would  subvert  the  very  work  he  had  assigned 
rliem,  the  work  of  regenerating  the  world  through  the  knowledge  of 
(tod  in  Christ ;  he  only  prays  that  they  may  be  inwardly  separated 
from  the  world  and  its  evil  powers,  and  sanctified  through  the  truth  he 
had  revealed;  that  his  life,  sanctified  to  God,  and  given  up  fur  them, 
mio-ht  become  the  irround  of  their  sanctification. 

He  then  extends  his  prayer  to  all  that  may  be  brought  to  faith  by 
their  preaching  (v.  20).  He  prays  that  they  may  be  united  in  the 
communion  of  life  with  God  which  he  had  established ;  that  by  it  they 
may  testify  of  him  ;  that  thereby  they  might  show  forth  the  glory  of 
the  inner  life  given  by  him,  and  bear  witness  of  that  love  of  God  (v. 
:io)  which  they  had  experienced  through  him.  (The  true  communion 
of  Christ's  disciples  shows  forth  His  glory,  and  the  glory  which  He 
has  imparted  to  them  ;  the  glory,  namely,  of  their  whole  relation  to 
Ctod  as  children,  secured  for  them  by  Him.  The  outward  appearance 
is  the  reflection  of  the  glory  within.t)  He  then  prays  (v.  24)  that  all 
those  who  are  "  given  to  him"  (already  united  with  him — his  glory  al- 
ready revealed  in  them)  may  be  raised  up  to  be  where  He  is,  to  com- 
plete communion  with  him,  to  the  beholding  of  his  Divine  glory  (and 
this  implies  a  shai-e  in  that  glory ;  for  intuition  and  life  coincide  in  the 
Divine).  • 

This  incomparable  prayer  of  consecration  for  his  own,  and  for  all 
mankind,  is  closed  with  the  words,  "  O  Jioly\  Father,  the  world  hath, 
not  known  thee  (lost  in  sin,  it  cannot  know  the  Holy  One) ;  hut  I  have 
known  thee  (the  Holy  One  knows  the  Holy  One) ;  and  these  have  known 
that  thou  hast  sent  vie  (they  are,  therefore,  separated  from  the  world  of 
sin,  which  is  estranged  from  the  Holy  God)  ;  and  I  have  declared  unto 
them  thy  name  (have  revealed  unto  them  Thee,  as  the  Holy  One,  and 

*  He  considers  those,  and  those  only,  as  truly  his  own  who  follow  the  inward  Divine 
call,  the  "  drawing"  of  the  Father.     Cf.  p.  138,  360. 

t  In  all  time  the  spread  of  Christianity  is  most  advanced  by  the  power  of  the  Christian 
life-  I  I  translate  I'lKau,  "holy;"  cf  xvi.,  10;  1  John,  ii.,  29;  iii.,  7,  10. 


404  GETHSEMANE. 

not  only  as  the  Holy  God,  but  as  the  Holy  Father,  with  whom  they 
stand  in  child-like  communion),  and  will  declare  it  further  (all  that  had 
been  revealed  was  but  the  germ,  as  it  were,  of  subsequent  develope- 
ments) ;  tliat  the  love  wherewith  thou  hast  loved  me  may  he  in  them,  and 
I  in  them  (that  as  they  know  Thee  more  and  more  through  the  revela- 
tions of  my  spirit,  they  may,  in  communion  with  me,  learn  more  and 
more  how  thou  lovest  me  and  those  that  belong  to  me)."' 

Thus  this  prayer  embraces  the  whole  work  of  Christ,  up  to  its  final 
consummation  ;  his  work,  upon  the  basis  laid  down  by  himself,  contin- 
ually carried  on,  until  all  that  submit  to  him  shall  be  brought  to  a  share 
in  his  glory — to  a  complete  communion  of  Divine  life  with  him. 
What  is  expressed  in  the  "  Lord's  Prayer"  as  the  object  of  the  prayer 
of  believers  is  hei'e  presented  as  the  object  of  his  own  prayer^br  be- 
lievers. 


CHAPTER  V. 
GETHSEMANE. 

§  279.  Comparison  of  John's  Gospel  with  the  fiynopiical  Gospels  in  re- 
gard to  Jesus'  Covjlict  of  Soul. — Historical  Credibilitj/  of  the  Synop- 
tical Account. 
FULL  of  celestial  serenity,  Jesus  went  forth  with  the  disciples,  as 
was  his  wont,  to  the  garden  at  the  foot  of  the  Mount  of  Olives,  to 
await  the  coming  of  his  captors.  Various  alternations  of  feeling  en- 
sued in  his  soul ;  and  in  regard  to  them  there  is  an  obvious  difference 
between  the  synoptical  Gospels  and  John ;  the  former  not  mentioning 
them  at  all,  the  latter  giving  a  partial  account  of  them.  In  modei-n 
times  this  discrepancy  has  been  supposed  by  some  to  be  irreconcila- 
ble ;  so  much  so  that  one  side  or  the  other  must  be  maintained,  ac- 
cording to  the  view  which  we  take  of  the  whole  subject. 

It  is  argued  that  we  cannot  imagine  Christ,  who  had  just  spoken 
with  such  Divine  confidence,  and  had  poured  out  his  soul  before  God 
in  a  prayer  of  heavenly  calmness  and  assurance,  as  undergoing,  imme- 
diately after,  such  struggles  of  soul  as  are  recorded  in  the  synoptical 
Gospels.  But,  laying  John's  Gospel  out  of  the  case,  do  we  not  find 
the  same  contrast  in  the  other  Gospels  ]  Was  not  all  this  heavenly 
elevation,  serenity,  and  confidence  presupposed  in  the  institution  of  the 
Eucharist,  according  to  its  deeper  sense]  Was  not  that  act,  the 
pledge  of  his  continuing  communion  with  the  Church,  as  recorded  in 
the  first  three  CSospcls,  as  great  "a  proof  of  those  high  thoughts  on  which 
his  calmness  was  founded,  as  is  contained  in  the  final  discourse  and 


APPARENT  DISCREPANCIES.  405 

prayer  given  by  John?  Nay,  even  in  these  last,  can  we  not  trace  al- 
ternations of  feeling;  subordinate,  however,  to  the  fundamental  and 
Divine  tone  ? 

As  for  these  alternations  of  feeling  themselves,  may  we  not  con- 
ceive, that  as,  in  the  life  of  believers,  who  represent  (imperfectly  in- 
deed) the  image  of  Christ  on  earth,  calmness  and  tumult,  confidence 
and  despondency,  alternate  with  each  other  under  the  diverse  influen- 
ces of  the  outward  world,*  so  too  there  might  be  similar  fluctuations 
(unconnected,  however,  with  the  reactions  of  sin,  which  might  exist  in 
believerst)  in  the  soul  of  Him  who,  with  all  his  Divine  elevation,  Avas 
like  unto  man  in  all  things  but  sin,  and  sympathized,  unutterably,  with 
all  purely  human  feelings  IJ 

Even  in  Juhii's  account  of  the  raising  of  Lazarus  we  find  such  al- 
ternations in  the  prominency  of  the  Divinity  and  the  humanity  of 
Christ ;  would  not,  therefore,  similar  manifestations  at  the  approach  of 
death  be  in  harmony  with  his  image,  as  depicted  by  John  himself? 
Moreover,  both  John  and  Luke  alluded  to  the  heginnings  of  this  strug- 
gle of  soul  at  different  times  before  ;§  momentary,  however,  and  soon 
followed  by  the  accustomed  confidence  of  Divinity.  In  John,  xiii., 
21,11  we  find  Jesus  "  troubled  in  spirit"  in  contemplating  Judas.  It 
would  be  contrary  to  all  analogy,  then,  that  such  moments  should  not 
occur,  even  with  increased  intensity,  amid  the  ever-accumulating  pangs 
both  of  soul  and  body  that  he  endured  up  to  the  moment  of  the  final 
and  triumphant  exclamation.  "  But,"  it  will  perhaps  be  said,  "  ac- 
cording to  John's  account,  there  loas  no  struggle  of  soul  at  last."  How, 
then,  coi^ld  John  record  Christ's  "  trouble  of  soul"  (xii.,  27)  in  view  of 
the  last  hour,  and  his  wish^  (xiii.,  27)  that  the  catastrophe  might  be 
hastened  \ 

The  account  of  the  agony  in  the  garden,  taken  from  the  other  Gos- 
pels, can  be  aptly  inserted  in  John's  narrative.  "  But  why,  then,  does 
John  not  record  it"?"  It  is  enough  to  say,  hi  reply  to  thig,  that  his  ob- 
ject was,  not  to  give  a  complete  biography,  but  to  arrange  a  number 
of  separate  features  of  the  great  picture,  according  to  a  peculiar  point 
of  view.  If  John,  having  intimated  the  beginnings  of  this  struggle  in 
the  soul  of  Jesus,  preferred,  instead  of  delineating  all  its  subsequent 
stages,  to  picture  forth  the  Divine  elevation  of  Christ  as  shown  in  his 

*  Cf.  John  the  Baptist.  t  Cf.  p.  79,  82. 

+  Thus  did  that  genuine  disciple  of  Christ,  John  Huss,  who  had  formed  his  life  upon  the 
intuition  of  Christ's  example,  learn  from  the  experience  of  his  own  last  struggles  how  to 
comprehend  these  opposite  manifestations  in  the  Saviour's  life.  With  reference  to  such 
alternations  in  his  own  experience,  he  writes  :  "  Pro  certo  grave  est,  imperturbate  gaudere, 
et  omnc  gaudium  existimare,  in  variis  tentationibus.  Leve  est  loqui  et  illud  exponere,  sed 
gi-ave  implere.  Siquideni  patieutissimus  et  fortissimus  miles,  sciens  quod  die  tertia  esset 
resurrecturus,  et  per  mortem  suam  vincens  inimicos,  post  coenam  ultimam  turbatus  est  spi- 
rita  et  dixit, — tristis  est  anima,  usque  ad  mortem." 

$  Cf.  p.  314,  376.  II  Cf.  p.  387.  H  Cf.  p.  388. 


406  GETHSEMANE. 

last  discourses,  can  we  infer  any  thing  from  this,  except  that  in  his  de- 
lineation certain  features  of  Christ's  picture  are  more  prominent  than 
others  ?  Throughout,  it  is  the  method  of  John's  Gospel  to  present 
connected  chains  of  Christ's  discourses  and  acts,  rather  than  isolated 
incidents,  however  characteristic,  such  as  we  find  in  the  other  Evangel- 
ists. Moreover,  as  an  eye-witness  of  this  last  struggle,  he  was  not  in 
a  state  of  mind  to  perceive,  and  subsequently  to  describe,  it  as  a  whvie. 
It  must  not  be  inferred,  however,  from  this  last  remark,  that  the  disci- 
ples could  not  have  remembered,  and  faithfully  recorded,  individual 
features  that  made  a  deep  impression  upon  them. 

Let  us  now  dwell  for  a  moment  upon  the  credibility  of  the  synop- 
tical account.  It  agrees  entirely  with  Heb.,  v.,  7,  which  was  founded 
upon  direct  Apostolical  ti-adition.  How  can  it  be  conceived  that  such 
a  description  of  Christ's  agony  could  have  arisen  from  an  invented  le- 
gend, intended  to  gloriftj  him  ]  Nor  can  it  be  said  that  it  was  made 
up  by  collecting  and  putting  together  the  various  types  and  prophecies 
of  the  Old  Testament  that  prefigured  such  an  agony ;  after  the  de- 
scription was  extant,  as  history,  it  was  natural  that  these  should  be 
gathered  up,  and  doctrinal  reasons  assigned  for  the  agony  itself;  but 
hcfore,  its  invention  would  have  been  utterly  inconsistent  with  the  idea, 
generally  prevalent,  of  the  glory  of  Messiah.  In  the  representations 
of  the  Evangelists,  particularly  Matthew,  we  can  detect  no  aim  but  a 
historical  one ;  not  a  trace  of  doctrinal  motives  can  be  discovered  ; 
only  at  a  later  period  were  such  thrust  upon  them  by  that  wilfulness 
which  can  find  in  a  narrative  any  thing  it  chooses. 

It  was  easy,  indeed,  from  a  natural  point  of  view,  to  find  a  contra- 
diction between  such  expressions  of  human  weakness  on  the  part  of 
Chinst,  and  his  miracle-working  power,  his  conscious  dignity  as  Mes- 
siah or  as  the  Son  of  God,  his  foreknowledge  of  his  resurrection,  &c 
Nor  could  such  a  contradiction  ever  have  naturally  arisen  from  an 
idealizing  invention.  It  was  precisely  with  a  view  to  do  it  away  as  a 
ground  of  objection,  that  a  Docctic  Christ  was  afterward  conceived  in 
place  of  the  real  Christ;  or,  his  human  nature  was  sundered  from  the 
Divine.  The  Divinity,  the  Divine  Logos,  was  recognized  in  the  mira- 
cles and  lofty  discourses  ;  but  it  was  feigned  that  this  Logos,  the  true 
Redeemer,  withdrew  from  Christ  during  his  sufferings. 

Such  a  Christ,  indeed,  as  the  real  Christ,  was  always  a  stone  of 
stumbling  for  Jewish  modes  of  thought.  How  much,  therefore,  must 
the  author  of  the  ejiistle  to  the  Hebrews  have  been  concerned  to  re- 
move this  rock  of  offence,  and  to  prove  that  these  very  struggles  be- 
longed necessarily  to  the  Messianic  calling?  To  be  sure,  after  the 
idea  of  Messiah  had  once  been  modified  according  to'the  real,  histori- 
cal Chx'ist,  and  the  minds  of  men  had  thereby  received  a  now  tendency, 


THE  AGONY.  407 

it  was  easy  to  find  the  higher  unity  for  all  these  contradictions,  and 
combine  them  all  into  the  one  idea.  But  we  can  by  no  means  infer 
from  this  possibility  its  converse,  viz.,  that  the  new  idea,  suddenly 
arising  like  a  Deus  ex  machina,  could  have  given  birth  to  such  a  his- 
toiical  representation  of  Christ. 

■^  280.   The  Agony  in  the^Gardcn.     (Matt.,  xxvi. ;  Mark,  xiv. ;   Luke, 

xxii.) 

In  prayer  and  retirement  Christ  had  prepared  himself  for  the  hegin- 
ning  of  his  public  ministry ;  in  prayer  and  retirement  he  now  prepared 
to  close  his  calling  on  earth.  As  then,  so  now,  before  entering  upon 
the  outward  conflict,  he  passed  through  it  in  the  inward  struggles  of 
his  soul.  Then  he  had  in  spirit  gained  the  victory,  before  he  appeared 
openly  among  men  a  conqueror ;  now  the  conquest  of  suffering  was 
achieved  within,  before  the  final,  outward  triumph. 

Arrived  at  the  garden,  he  took  apart  Peter,  James,  and  John,  his 
three  best-loved  disciples,  to  be  the  honoured  witnesses  of  his  prayer, 
and  to  pray  with  him.  From  the  nature  of  the  case,  w^e  could  not  have 
so  full  an  account  of  this  as  of  his  prayer  for  his  disciples  (John,  xvii.). 
In  the  pains  of  suffering  that  are  pressing  upon  him  he  prays,  "  Father, 
^f  It  he  possible,  let  this  cup  jklss  from  me.'^  But  this  feeling  could  not 
for  a  moment  shake  his  submission  to  the  Divine  will.  All  other  feel- 
ings are  absorbed  in  the  fundamental  longing,  "  Thy  ivill  be  done.'''' 
The  Divinity  is  distinguished  from  the  Humanity ;  and  by  this  distinc- 
tion their  unity,  in  the  subordination  of  the  one  to  the  other,  was  to  be 
made  prominent.  As  a  7nan,  he  might  wish  to  be  spared  the  sufferings 
that  awaited  him,  even  though  from  a  higher  point  of  view  he  saw  their 
necessity  ;  just  as  a  Christian  may  be  convinced  that  he  ought  to  make 
a  certain  sacrifice  in  the  service  of  God,  and  yet,  in  darker  moments, 
his  purely  human  feelings  may  rise  against  it,  until  his  conviction,  and 
his  will  guided  by  his  conviction,  at  last  prevail.  It  was  not  merely  that 
Christ's  physical  nature  had  to  struggle  with  death,  and  such  a  death, 
but  his  soul  had  to  be  moved  to  its  deptlis  by  sympathy  with  the  suffer- 
ino-s  of  mankind  on  account  of  sin.*     Thus  the  wish  might  arise  within 

"^  By  the  "cup"  we  mast  understand  not  only  his  suffering  of  death,  but  all  that  pre- 
ceded and  followed  it :  the  treason  of  Judas,  the  raj^e  of  Christ's  enemies,  the  delusion  of 
the  multitude.  It  is  not  my  object  here  to  set  forth  the  higher  doctrinal  and  theological 
import  of  the  death  of  Christ ;  yet  I  agi-ee  heartily  in  tlie  following,  from  Dettinger's  beau- 
tiful dissertation  on  Christ's  agony  (Tubing.  Zeitschrift,  1833,  i.,  95,  96)  :  "While,  on  the 
one  hand,  iu  a  sinful  nature,  the  conviction  that  death  is  a  judgment  for  sin  is  blunted  in 
proportion  as  the  power  of  sin  in  the  individual  is  greater,  and  the  sense  of  its  guilt  less; 
in  a  word,  in  proportion  as  the  harmonic  unity  of  life  is  disturbed  by  sin,  so  much  the 
more  powerful,  on  the  other  hand,  iu  a  sinless  human  nature,  in  which  the  unity  of  life's 
hannony  is  undisturbed,  must  be  the  conviction  that  death  is  a  judgment  for  sin,  a  dissolution 
and  separation,  not  originally  belonging  to  human  nature,  of  elements  which  in  all  stages  of 
the  developemeut  of  life  belong  together.''  I  can  make  this  agree,  also,  with  the  view  of 
the  conncxiou  between  sin  and  death  presented  in  my  "  Apostol.  Zeitalter,"  vol.  ii. 


408  GETHSEMANE. 

him,  as  a  man,  to  be  spared  that  bitter  cup ;  only  on  condition,  how- 
ever, that  the  will  of  God  could  be  done  in  some  other  way.  But  the 
conviction  that  this  could  not  be,  immediately  followed  ;  he  knew,  from 
the  beginning,*  that,  according  to  the  plan  of  Divine  wisdom,  the  king- 
dom of  God  was  to  be  ft)uuded  tlu()U"h  his  self-sacrifice  in  the  struff- 
gle  with  the  sins  of  the  people ;  and  he  submitted  to  what  he  knew 
was  the  will  of  God  and  the  work  of  his  life.t 

As  a  proof  how  little  the  higher  calmness  of  his  spirit  was  disturbed 
by  these  uprisings  of  human  feeling,  we  find  him,  a  moment  after  the 
first  straggle,  caring  for  his  yet  weak  disciples.  Finding  them  ovei'- 
come  with  sleep,  he  roused  them,  saying,  "  Could  ye  not  ivatch  with  me 
one  hour?  Watch  and  pray,  that  ye  enter  not  into  temptation  (that  the 
outward  temptation  become  not  an  inward  onej) ;  for,  though  the  spirit 
is  willing  (as  in  their  fulness  of  love,  when  danger  was  not  pressing 
ujjon  them,  they  had  declared  themselves  ready  to  suflfer  all  things 
with  him  and  for  him),  the  flesh  is  iceak.^''  (The  impressions  of  out- 
ward danger  may  affect  the  flesh  so  strongly  as  to  bear  down  the 
spirit;  there  is  need,  therefoie,  of  Divine  power,  gained  by  prayer,  to 
strengthen  the  spirit  amid  these  fearful  impressions,  that  it  may  triumpli 
over  the  weakness  of  the  flesh.) 

Again  he  bends  in  prayer.  And  now  he  does  not  say,  "  If  it  he  pos- 
sible, let — ;"  but,  penetrated  by  the  conviction  that  the  counsel  of  Di- 
vine Wisdom  demands  the  sacrifice,  "  O  my  Father,  if  this  cup  may  not 
pass  away  from  me  except  I  drink  it.  Thy  will  he  done."  And  the  third 
lime  he  repeats  the  same  words.  The  victory  of  his  soul  was  gained; 
the  struggle  was  over,  until  the  brief  conflict  of  the  final  pang.  Find- 
ing the  disciples  still  asleep,  he  said  to  them,  "  Sleep  on  now ;  /  wil]§ 
rouse  you  no  more  to  watch  and  pray  with  me  ;  but  your  sleep  shall  be 
rudely  disturbed  ;  for  behold,  the  hour  of  my  suffering  is  at  hand. 
Already  my  captors  are  near." 

§  ^81.  The  Arrest  of  Christ.  —  Peter's  Haste,  and  its  Reproof.  —  The 
Poicer  of  Darkness. 
Judas  approached  with  a  band  of  armed  servitors  of  the  Sanhedrim 
and  a  part  of  a  Roman  cohort  from  the  garrison,  the  latter  as  a  guard 
against  a  disturbance  from  the  sympathy  of  the  people.  Pi-obably  the 
traitor  alone  knew  who  was  to  be  apprehended  ;||  as  there  was  good 

*  Cf.  p.  82.  t  Cf.  p.  344.  +  Cf.  p.  209. 

$  The  words  t&  Xonriv,  in  Matt.,  xxvi.,  45,  compol  us  to  take  these  words  as  a  waniing, 
or  reproof;  otherwise  tlie  word  kuOcvoctc  might  be  taken  as  the  indicative,  with  or  without 
iiiten-Qgation. 

II  We  may  the  more  expect  dill'uronces  in  tlie  four  acrounts  licre,  from  the  state  of  mind 
in  wliich  the  disciples  must  necessarily  have  been.     Discrepancies,  even  if  irreconoihiblu 


THE  ARREST.  409 

reason  (supposeJ,  at  least)  for  secrecy  in  the  procedure.  Jesus  did 
not  wait  for  Judas  and  the  band  to  enter  the  garden.  With  majestic 
calmness  he  went  to  meet  them,  and  asked,  "  Whom  seek  ye  ?"  His 
sudden  appearance  in  calm  majesty,  associated  with  the  impressions 
of  his  life  and  the  authority  of  his  name  as,  at  least,  a  prophet,  so  deeply 
affected  a  part  of  the  band  (not  the  Roman  soldiers*)  that  they  recoiled 
and  fell  on  the  ground  before  him.  In  their  perplexity  they  then 
prepared  to  seize  the  disciples,  pei'haps  because  they  made  show  of 
defending  their  Master.  The  rash  Peter  hastily  gave  way  to  impulse ; 
without  waiting  to  know  the  Master's  will,  he  made  use  of  the  sword. 
Christ  sharply  rebuked  his  precipitancy  :  "  All  that  take  the  sword  (un- 
called, as  here,  in  resistance  to  authority  that  is  to  be  respected  as  the 
ordinance  of  God)  shall  perish  by  the  sioord  (as  a  judgiuent  for  re- 
bellion against  the  order  of  God;  a  warning  against  the  use  of  force  to 
defend  his  cause  against  the  state) ;  thlnkest  thou  that  I  cannot  now 
]iray  to  my  Father^  and  he  shall  presently  give  me  more  than  twelve^ 
legions  of  angels?  (This  he  could  only  have  done  had  the  Divine  will 
been  so.)  The  cup  which  my  Father  hath  given  me,  -^'all  I  not  drink 
it  IX  (not  the  human  choice,  but  the  higher  necessity,  must  prevail.)" 

Turning  then  to  the  band,  he  said  to  them,  more  than  once,  "  I  am 
he  whom  ye  seek;  let  these  go  their  way."  And  this  saying — sup- 
ported by  that  authority  which  had  so  impressed  them  that  they  would 
not  have  ventured  to  lay  hands  on  him  had  he  not  given  himself  up — 
this  saying  caused  them  to  let  the  disciples  go,  and  to  take  no  vengeance 
on  Peter,  exasperated  as  they  were  by  his  resistance.§ 

in  points  of  detail,  do  uot  impeach  the  veracity  of  the  essential  features  of  a  narrative ; 
but  in  this  case  they  are  not  so  irreconcilable  as  has  been  supposed.  According  to  John, 
whom  vce  have  followed,  Judas  and  the  band  remained  outside,  and  Jesus  went  out  and 
£;ave  himself  up:  the  other  Evangelists  report  that  Judas  gave  the  signal  by  a  kiss.  But 
as  John's  account  gives  no  reason  at  all  for  Judas's  coming,  and  as  it  could  uot  have  been 
to  show  the  way  to  the  garden,  we  must  suppose  it  was  impelled  by  pure  hatred,  or  by  a 
desire  to  see  the  end  of  the  matter  (this  would  suit  the  view  that  he  did  not  betray  Jesus 
with  hostile  intent,  and  expected  a  miracle),  or  that  he  came  to  point  out  the  person  to  be 
seized,  and  this  leads  us  directly  to  the  statement  of  the  other  Gospels.  The  sign  agreed 
upon  may  have  been  omitted,  or  given  at  the  wrong  moment,  in  the  confusion  of  his  mind, 
produced  by  a  bad  conscience  and  a  reverence  that  he  could  not  get  rid  of;  so  that  the  dif- 
ferent accounts  may  entirely  hannonize.  In  any  case,  John's  statement  is  the  more  simple, 
and  we  rely  upon  it. 

*  Had  these  cai-ed  at  all  about  the  matter,  they  would  not  have  served  as  instruments  of 
the  Jewish  authorities. 

t  Instead  of  the  Twelve  Apostles,  who  made  show  of  defending  him. 

X  John,  xviii.,  11,  referring  to  the  prayer  in  the  garden.  The  preceding  woi-ds,  omitted  by 
John,  are  strongly  characteristic  of  the  Spirit  of  Christ. 

$  It  is  mentioned  by  all  the  Evangelists  that  Peter  cut  off  the  ear  of  the  high-priest's 
servant.  It  cannot  but  appear  surprising  that  this  arbitrary  act  produced  no  more  serious 
consequences  to  the  rash  Apostle.  The  healing  of  the  ear,  mentioned  by  Luke,  might 
serve  as  an  explanation;  but  John  says  nothing  about  it.  His  naixative,  however,  explains 
all  in  the  way  given  by  us  in  the  text ;  and  its  veracity,  therefore,  is  confirmed  by  com- 
parison with  the  other  Gospels. 


410  THE  TRIAL  AND  CONDEMNATION. 

When  tbe  person  of  Jesus  was  secured,  he  said,  further,  "  Are  ye 
come  out,  as  against  a  thief,  with  armed  bands,  to  take  me  ]  When  I 
was  daily  with  you  in  the  Temple,  ye  stretched  forth  no  hands  against 
me  ;  but  this  is  your  hour,  and  th^  power  of  darkness."*  During  his 
public  teaching  none  ventured  to  assail  him.  The  power  of  darkness 
shuns  the  light  of  day.  The  Sanhedrim  found  the  night  the  fitting  time 
to  execute  their  schemes;  the  policy  that  springs  from  darkness,  and 
serves  it,  must  not  show  itself  in  open  day.  Perhaps  the  words  also 
allude  to  the  brief  duration  of  the  power  of  evil.t 


CHAPTER  VI. 

THE    TRIAL   AND    CONDEMNATION. 
§  282.  Night-Examination  before  Annas. 

IN  the  mean  time,  the  high-priest,  Caiaphas,  informed  of  what  had 
passed,  had  summoned  a  council  of  the  Sanhedrim  at  his  palace  for 
the  trial  of  Jesus.  As  this  could  not  be  accomplished  until  daybreak, 
Jesus  was  taken  before  Ananos,  or  Annas,  the  former  high-priest, 
father-in-law  of  Caiaphas,  for  a  preliminary  examination.^ 

*  Christ  was  always  fain  to  point  from  tbe  sensible  to  tbe  spiritual ;  and  as  the  time 
chosen  to  execute  tbe  work  of  darkness  here  gave  occasion  for  such  a  connexion,  we  join 
tbe  two  together. 

t  In  any  event,  this  passage  refers  to  the  futile  attempts  before  made  to  secure  the  arrest 
of  Christ  of  which  John  informs  us ;  it  belongs,  also,  to  that  class  of  passages  which  can 
only  be  clearly  understood  in  the  light  of  John's  representation  of  the  history  (cf.  p.  2^-1 
204).  John,  xviii.,  20,  is  certainly  not  so  similar  to  the  above  passage  as  to  justify  the  in- 
.ference,  which  some  have  drawn,  that  the  one  is  but  a  variation  of  the  other.  True,  in 
Luke,  xxii.,  52,  tbe  words  are  addressed  to  tbe  chief  piicsts,  &c.,  which  could  not  be  liter- 
ally true  ;  but  we  explain  this  on  the  ground  that  they  were  addressed  through  the  instru- 
ments to  the  real  captors,  the  Sanhedrim ;  and  not  on  the  ground  of  an  interchange  witii 
John,  xviii.,  20. 

J  In  Luke,  xxii.,  66,  we  find  that  some  time  elapsed  between  the  arrest  and  the  meeting 
of  the  Council ;  the  latter  occurring  "  as  soon  as  it  was  day.''  This  accounts  for  tbe  arraign- 
ment before  Annas,  mentioned  only  by  John  (xviii.,  13).  As  for  the  invention  of  such  a  fact 
as  this,  the  idea  is  absurd;  there  could  bo  no  motive  for  it;  and  John  himself  only  relates 
it  by  the  way.  The  mention  of  such  minute  incidents,  however,  prove  him  to  have  been  an 
eye-witness. — (Note  to  ed.  4th.)  Blcek's  review  of  Ebrard  has  led  me  to  re-examine  this 
subject.  I  cannot  think  John  would  have  given  sucb  prominence  to  the  aiTaignment  bcforc 
Caiapbas  had  be  not  meant  to  unfold  this  preparatory  trial  further;  and,  therefore,  cannot 
suppose  that,  in  xviii.,  19-23,  he  records  the  official  examination  before  the  Council.  In 
tbat  case  be  certainly  would  bave  dwelt  upon  it  more,  and  made  more  of  it.  On  tbe  other 
iiand,  it  is  easy  to  understand  that  he  omi/tcd  the  latter  examination,  because  generally 
known  by  other  traditions,  and  gave  tbe  one  which  was  least  known.  In  fact,  this  is  presup- 
posed^ in  the  examination  before  Pilate,  as  recorded  by  him,  when  compared  with  the  ac- 
count of  the  trial  before  the  Council  in  tbe  other  Evangelists.  In  xviii.,  13,  express  men- 
tion is  made  of  Caiaplias  as  upxnpin  "fur  that  year,"  to  distinguish  him  from  Annas,  who 
h(no  the  same  title.  In  v.  14  he  cite.s  the  declaration  of  Caiaphas  (notable  as  coming  from 
the  lips  of  the  Head  of  Ecclesiastical  atl'airs  during  the  year  in  which  Christ  suflcrcd)  in 


BEFORE  CAIAPHAS.  411 

Annas  began  with  questions  about  his  followers  and  his  doctrine. 
But  Christ  gave  no  satisfactory  replies.  And  this  was  fully  consistent 
with  his  dignity ;  for  he  knew  that  the  questions  were  put  not  to  elicit 
truth,  but  to  extort  something  that  might  be  used  against  him  ;  that  the 
decision  was  as  good  as  made,  and  the  investigation  only  intended  to 
throw  over  it  the  forms  of  justice.  He  referred  Annas,  therefore,  to 
his  public  discourses  in  the  Temple  and  in  the  synagogues.  One  of 
the  servitors  deemed  his  reply  an  insult  to  the  high-priest's  dignity, 
and  struck  him  in  the  face.  The  blow  could  not  disturb  his  serenity 
of  soul;  he  only  asserted  the  justice  of  his  cause  in  saying,  "■  If  1 
liave  spoken  evil,  hear  loitness  of  the  evil ;  but  if  zoell,  why  smitest  thott 
mc  ?" 

§  283.  Morning. — Examination  hefore  Caiaphas. 
In  the  examination  before  the  Sanhedrim,  over  which  Caiaphas  pre 
sided,  Christ  preserved  the  same  silence  as  before  Annas,  and  for  sim- 
ilar reasons.  The  conflicting  evidence  of  the  witnesses  afforded  no 
ground  for  the  jjondemnation  on  which  the  court  had  already  decided. 
The  high-priest  insisted  on  his  defending  himself  against  the  witnesses; 
but  he  still  held  his  peace.  Finally,  he  called  upon  Jesus,  in  the  name 
of  the  Living  God,  to  declare  whether  or  not  he  was  "  Messiah,  the 
Son  of  God."  After  answering  in  the  affirmative,  Christ  announced 
the  great  events  then  approaching,  which  were  to  testify,  more  strongly 
than  words,  that  He  was  the  promised  Theocratic  King:  ^^  Hereafter 
shall  ye  see  the  Son  of  Man  sitting  o?i  the  right  hand  qfj^ower  (of  God), 
and  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven'''*  (a  figurative  expression,  implying, 
"  You  shall  see  me  prove  my  Divine  power  in  act,  spreading  my  king- 
dom, and  subduing  its  foes  in  spite  of  all  your  machinations ;"  the 
actual  proof  of  his  Messianic  dignity,  an  announcement  of  the  impend- 
ing judgment  of  God).  Then  the  high-piiest  rent  his  robes,  as  a  sign 
of  horror  at  the  blasphemy  uttered  by  Christ,  saying,  "  From  his  own 
lips  ye  have  heard  it."  He  was  then  condemned  to  death,  either  as  a 
false  prophet,  and  thereby  incurring  the  punishment  ordained  by  the 
law  of  Moses,  because  he  had  falsely  proclaimed  himself  Messiah  ;  or 
as  a  blasphemer,  because  he  had  attributed  Divine  honours  to  himself. 

rlcw  of  the  omission  of  the  full  trial  before  him.  In  v.  24,  ajler  the  examination,  it  is  stated 
that  Annas  "  sent  him  to  Caiaphas,  tlie  actual  high-priest."  Perhaps  the  leading  out  of 
Christ  occasioned  one  of  Aunas's  servants  to  put  the  question  (v.  25)  which  brought  out 
Peter's  second  denial ;  and  perhaps,  also,  Luke,  xxii.,  61,  should  be  joined  in  immediately 
after.  In  this  case  we  should  make  the  fore  court  of  the  house  of  Annas  the  scene  of 
Peter's  denials ;  and  might  infer  that,  when  this  preparatoi-y  examination  before  Annas 
was  forgotten,  or  laid  aside  as  unimportant,  the  denial  of  Peter,  which  was  preserved  on 
account  of  its  intrinsic  importance,  was  laid  in  the  court  of  Caiaphas,  in  connexion  with  the 
second  examination. 

*  Christ's  "coming,"  "coming  in  the  clouds,"  &c.,  not  only  indicate  his  second  advent 
a?  a  far-distant  period,  but  also  his  spiritual,  world-historical  manifestation. 


412  .     THE  TRIAL  AND  CONDEMNATION. 

The  latter  appears  more  probable  from  Matt.,  xxvi.  65,  66  ;  and,  in- 
deed, they  had  often  before  accused  him  of  blasphemy. 

After  the  condemnation  he  was  given  up,  as  one  expelled  fi-om  the 
Theocratic  nation,  to  the  rude  derision  and  mocking  of  the  servants  in 
the  court. 

§  284.  Double  Dealing  of  the  Sanlwdrim. 

It  is  obvious,  at  first  sight,  that  the  procedure  of  the  Sanhedrim  in 
condemning  Christ  was  illegal  and  arbitrary.  It  was  not  a  regular  in- 
quiry after  the  truth  ;  Christ  stood  in  the  way  of  the  hierarchy,  and  his 
case  bad  been  prejudged;  Caiaphas  himself  had,  in  fact,  announced 
that  his  death  was  decided  on.  A  wicked  policy  demanded  the  vic- 
tim. Moreover,  the  necessity  of  putting  him  to  death  before  the  feast 
caused  the  sentence  to  be  hastened  as  rapidly  as  possible  under  the 
forms  of  justice. 

It  must  be  borne  in  inind  that  at  that  time  the  Sanhedrim  had  only 
subordinate  authority  to  assign  penalties  for  violations  of  the  religious 
law ;  it  could  not  lawfully  pronounce  sentence  of  death  without  the 
authority  of  the  Roman  governor.*  It  had,  therefore,  to  seek,  in 
Christ's  case,  some  plausible  grounds  for  condemnation  that  would 
stand  the  scrutiny  of  that  officer.  No  accusation  of  heresy,  blasphemy, 
or  false  assumption  of  the  prophetic  character  would  suffice.  Some 
political  charge  must,  therefore,  be  trumped  up.  But  in  this  the  hie- 
rarchical party  had  to  act  in  direct  opposition  to  their  own  convictions  ; 
.lesus  had  always  refused  to  meddle  with  civil  affairs.  It  is  true,  he 
had  been  attended  into  the  city  by  an  enthusiastic  multitude,  acknowl- 
edging him  as  Messiah  ;  but  his  withdrawal  from  them,  and,  indeed, 
all  his  movements  on  that  occasion,  abundantly  proved  that  he  had  no 
intention  to  make  use  of  worldly  means.  This  is  shown  sufficiently  by 
the  fact  that  no  attempt  was  made  by  the  Sanhedrim  to  use  the  tri- 
umphal entry  as  ground  for  a  political  charge.  Had  it  been  at  all 
suspicious  in  that  respect,  the  Roman  governor  would  have  taken  it 
up  ;  as  popular  movements  of  the  kind  were  generally,  and  with  o^ood 
reason,  looked  upon  with  distrust. 

A  charge  of  interference  with  the  state,  then,  could  not  be  sus- 
tained, even  according  to  the  judgment  of  his  enemies.  It  was  clear 
that  he  had  used  no  other  influence  over  men's  minds  than  the  inward 
power  of  his  words  and  works  to  move  their  convictions  ;   and  this  was 

*  Joseph.,  Arch-TBol.,  xx.,  9,  §  1.  The  high-priest,  Aiiaiius  (Annas),  lia<l  taken  advantage 
of  the  absence  of  the  govenior  to  inflict  capital  [luiiishnient  ou  the  authority  of  the  Sau- 
hedrim.  He  was  accused  for  the  act  before  the  Prefect  Albinus  :  ""fiy  oinc  t'^oV  i> 'Araiv 
Xuipli  rns  iKiivov  yi'uijrii  KuOiaat  avvci^piov;"  obviously  showing  that  the  consent  of  the  gov- 
ernor was  essential  in  such  cases.  The  misdemeanor  was  deemed  so  grave  that  Ananus 
was  removed  from  ollice.  The  reading  of  S^rckellos,  "  iKcvviav,"  would  give  an  entirely 
difl'erent  meaning ;  but  it  is  obviously  incorrect.  • 


BEFORE  PILATE.  413 

obviously  beyond  the  sphere  of  civil  jurisdiction.  But  antiquity  could 
not  conceive  of  a  holy  sphere  of  conscience  and  conviction  beyond  the 
reach  of  human  tribunals.  It  was  first  opened  to  the  Old-World  con- 
sciousness by  the  idea  of  the  kingdom  of  God  as  brought  to  light  by 
Christ.  Before,  either  religion  was  subordinated  to  the  state,  or  tht; 
state  to  religion  (the  latter  being  the  Theocracy  in  its  political  form  ; 
the  former  being  state-religions).  In  the  Jewish  constitution  (which, 
however,  did  not  exist  in  its  original  form  under  the  Roman  sway)  the 
state  was  subordinate  to  religion.  It  was  the  crime  of  the  Sanhedrim 
that  it  decided,  arbitrarily,  to  retain  this  old  stand-point,  contrary  to  the 
judgment  of  God,  as  shown  in  the  signs  of  the  times  pointed  out  by 
Christ;  that  it  would  not  give  up  its  selfish  interests,  or  bow  before 
the  higher  power  which  had  come  into  the  world  to  break  down  the 
old  landmarks.  Even  if  it  could  not  fully  admit  Christ's  claims,  it  was 
bound,  on  its  own  stand-point,  to  investigate  the  proofs  which  he  offered 
in  testimony  of  his  Divine  calling;  and  when  phenomena  appeared 
which  could  iiot  be  explained  except  as  the  workings  of  the  Spirit  of 
God,  at  least  to  leave  them,  as  Gamaliel  did  afterward,  to  the  judg- 
ment of  God  as  history*  should  unfold  it.  But  the  grounds  of  the  in- 
capacity of  the  heads  of  the  hierarchy  to  admit  the  proofs  of  Christ's 
Divine  calling  had  often  before  been  pointed  out  by  himself;  the  in- 
ability was  a  moral  one,  founded  in  their  dispositions  of  heart,  and 
therefore  it  was  guilty. \ 

As  before  remarked,  the  grounds  on  which  the  Sanliedrim  condemned 
Christ  were  not  sufficient  to  induce  Pilate,  the  Roman  procurator,  t(. 
inflict  capital  punishment  upon  him.  Another  charge  was  needed. 
To  serve  the  purpose,  recourse  was  had  to  his  claim  of  Messiahship, 
on  which  they  had  professed  to  found  their  own  decision,  with  the 
addition  of  a  political  element :  "  He  has  claimed  to  be  a  king;"  and 
hence  "  he  perverts  the  nation  (contests  the  Roman  authority),  and  for- 
bids to  give  tribute  to  Caesar." |  An  accusation  of  this  sort  could  be 
the  more  readily  admitted,  as  the  Roman  authorities  were  well  aware 
that  the  Jews  felt  themselves  degraded  and  disgraced  by  paying  taxes 
to  a  heathen  power. 

§  285.  Jesus  before  Pilate. —  Christ's  Ivingdom  not  "  of  this  World." 
The  procurator,  Pontius  Pilate,  a  representative  of  the  rich  and  cor 

*  To  this  judgment  Moses  refers,  Deut.,  xviii.,  20-22.  t  Cf.  p.  29:i,  294. 

J:  Luke,  xxiii.,  3.  This  passage  is  obviously  presupposed  in  John,  xviii.,  33.  Jolin's  ac- 
count takes  many  things  for  gi-anted  tliat  are  recorded  in  the  other  Gospels  ;  but  the  latter, 
ill  tarn,  must  often  find  their  supplement  in  the  foniicr,  as  is  the  case  in  this  part  of  Luke. 
None  but  an  eye-witness  could  have  given  the  account  in  so  exact  a  connexion  as  John's. 
The  simple  reply  to  Pilate's  question,  ai  \iyus,  as  given  in  Luke,  xxiii.,  3,  Matt.,  xxvii., 
11,  needs  the  further  explanation  given  by  John  (xviii.,  36,  37),  to  make  it  fully  accord  witl) 
the  facts  ;  for  he  vyas  not,  and  did  not  claim  to  be,  "  King  of  the  Jevv's,"  in  the  Roman  sense 
of  the  plirase  :  nor  could  Pilate  have  pronounced  him  guiltless  after  such  a  declaration 


414  THE  TRIAL  AND  CONDEMNATION. 

rupt  Romans  of  that  age,  acted  throughout  the  case  in  accorJance 
witn  his  well-known  character.  An  enemy  to  the  Jews,  he  was  glad 
of  an  opportunity  to  vex  and  mock  them.  But,  oh  the  other  hand,  his 
administration  had  been  marked  by  many  acts  of  arbitrary  injustice, 
and  his  evil  conscience  feared  an  accusation  from  the  Jews,  such,  in- 
deed, as  subsequently  wi'ought  his  downfall.  Care  for  his  own  security, 
therefore,  led  him  to  avoid  giving  them  any  handle  against  him  on  this 
occasion ;  and  he  was  by  no  means  inclined  to  sacrifice  his  own  inter- 
ests to  those  of  innocence  and  justice.  With  all  his  disposition  to  save 
a  man  guiltless  of  political  crimes,  and  whose  zeal  he  perhaps  himself 
acknowledged  to  be  well-meant,  it  was  no  part  of  his  character  to  risk 
personal  or  political  objects  in  such  a  cause. 

The  Sanhedrim,  in  delivering  Jesus  up  to  Pilate  as  "  a  disturber  of 
the  public  peace,"  expected  that  he  would  be  satisfied  with  their  rec- 
ognition of  the  Roman  authority,  and  lend  his  power,  without  further 
inquiry,  to  the  execution  of  their  decree.  But  Pilate,  seeing  no  grounds 
for  immediate  acquiescence,  demanded  a  more  particular  accusation. 
As  he  had  heard  of  no  disturbance  produced  by  Jesus,  the  statement 
made  by  the  deputies  of  the  Sanhedrim  appeared  by  no  means  credi- 
ble ;  and,  suspecting  that  religious  disputes  were  at  the  bottom,  he 
wished  to  get  rid  of  the  whole  affair,  and  told  them  "  to  take  him,  and 
judge  him  according  to  their  law."  The  deputies  understood  his 
meaning.  But  to  treat  the  case  as  a  purely  ecclesiastical  one,  and  in- 
flict only  a  corresponding  penalty  on  Jesus,  was  not  what  they  desired. 
Their  desire  and  wishes  were  distinctly  expressed  In  their  reply :  "  It 
is  not  lawful  for  us  to  jmt  any  man  to  deathy 

The  procurator  thought  it  necessary,  therefore,  to  enter  upon  the 
political  accusation,  although  he  believed  it  to  be  unfounded  ;  and  said 
to  Jesus,  not  without  mockery,  "■Art  thou  the  King  of  the  Jews  ?"  To 
this  question  Christ  could  give  neither  an  express  affirmative  nor  an 
express  negative  :  in  the  religious  sense,  the  answer  must  be  "  Yes  ;" 
in  the  political,  "  No."  He,  therefore,  asked  Pilate,  "  Sayest  tliou  tins 
thing  of  thyself  [i.  e.,  inquiring  whether  he  asked  the  question  in  the 
Roman  sense,  and  thought,  with  reference  to  the  rights  of  the  state, 
that  Christ  was  liable  to  the  accusation  of  claiming  to  be  "king"),  or 
did  others  tell  it  thee  of  me  V  Pilate  answered  that  he  did  nothing 
more  than  repeat  the  accusation  brought  by  the  Jews.  And  Jesus  an- 
fiwered,  "  My  kingdom  is  not  of  this  worUV  (not  worldly  in  its  nature, 
its  instruments,  or  its  ponflicts).  He  proved  its  unworldly  character 
by  the  means  he  used  in  founding  it :  "7/"  my  kingdom  were  of  this 
xcorld,  then  would  my  servants  fight,"  &;c. ;  "  hut  note  is  my  kingdom 
not  from  hence^ 

The  very  words  in  which  Christ  denied  that  he  was  king  in  a  world- 


BEFORE  HEROD.  415 

ly  sense,  implied  that  in  another  sense  he  certainly  claimed  to  be  both 
a  king  and  the  fomider  of  a  kingdom.  He  then  defined  more  exactly 
the  sense  in  which  he  was  both  :  "  To  this  end  was  I  horn,  and  for  this 
cause  came  I  into  this  zvorld,  that  I  should  bear  witness  unto  the  trtith." 
It  followed  that  He  could  be  recognized  as  King,  and  the  nature  of  his 
kingdom  be  understood  by  those  only  who  were  susceptible  of  receiv- 
ing the  truth  :  "  Every  one  that  is  of  the  truth  hearcth  my  voiced  This 
was,  at  the  same  time,  a  summons  to  the  conscience  of  Pilate  himself. 
]3ut  the  procurator — a  type  of  the  educated  E/^man  world,  especially 
of  its  higher  classes,  lost  in  worldly-mindedness,  and  conscious  of  no 
higher  wants  than  -those  of  this  life — had  no  such  sense  for  truth. 
"  What  is  truth  ?"  was  his  mocking  question.  "  Trtith  is  an  empty 
name,'"  he  meant  to  say. 

§  286.  Jcsns  sent  to  Herod. 

Pilate  now  looked  upon  Jesus  simply  as  a  religious  enthusiast,  in- 
nocent of  all  political  crimes,  and  told  the  deputies  that  he  "  could  find 
no  fault  in  him  at  all."  They  then  rejjlied  (Luke,  xxiii.,  5)  that  his 
reaching  had  stirred  up  the  people  every  where,  from  Galilee  to  Jeru- 
salem. As  soon  as  Pilate  heard  that  Jesus  was  of  Galilee,  it  occurred 
to  him  to  lay  the  case  before  Herod  Antipas,  tetrarch  of  Galilee  and 
Judea,  who  had  just  then  come  to  the  feast  at  Jerusalem. 

Herod  had  for  long  wished  to  see  Jesus.*  The  fame  of  the  mira- 
cles inspired  him  with  curiosity  to  see  what  Christ  could  do.  But  it 
was  no  part  of  the  Saviour's  calling  to  satisfy  an  idle  curiosity.  To 
describe  his  doctrine  fully  to  a  man  so  utterly  worldly,  would  have 
been,  in  his  own  language,  to  "  cast  pearls  before  swine."t  He,  there- 
fore, answered  none  of  Herod's  questions.  The  disappointed  king, 
having  arrayed  the  Saviour,  in  mockery,  in  a  gorgeous  purple  robe, 
and  exposed  him  to  the  cruel  sport' and  derision  of  the  soldiers,  sent 
liim  back  to  the  procurator.  Doubtless  the  latter  was  confirmed  in 
his  own  views  by  the  word  which  Herod  sent  him. 

§  287.  Pilate's  fruitless  Efforts  to  save  Jesus. —  The  Dream  of  Pilate's 

'Wife. 
In  honour  of  the  Passover,  and  as  a  privilege  to  the  Jews,  pardon 
was  granted  every  year  to  a  criminal  condemned  to  death.  Pilate  en- 
deavoured to  make  use  of  this  privilege  in  favour  of  Jesus ;  hopint/ 
thus  at  once  to  admit  the  validity  of  the  decree  of  the  Sanhedrim,  and 
yet  leave  it  unexecuted.  In  order  to  satisfy  their  hatred  against  Jesus 
to  some  extent,  he  proposed,  not  to  free  him  from  all  punishment,  but 
to  mitigate  it  into  scourging.  But  the  multitude,  always  open  to  the 
impressions  of  the  moment — the  very  multitude  who,  a  few  days  be- 

*  Cf.  p.  323.  t  Cf.  p.  277. 


416  THE  TRIAL  AND  CONDEMNATION. 

fore,  had  welcomed  Jesus,  with  shouts  of  enthusiasm,  as  Theocratic 
King — were  now,  when  their  carnal  expectations  were  deceived,  blind 
instruments  of  the  Sanhedrim,  and  obedient  to  every  fanatical  impulse 
of  the  Pharisees.  They  clamoured  for  the  pardon  of  a  murderer  rather 
than  of  the  false  prophet  (as  they  held  him)  who  had  deceived  their 
hopes. 

The  procurator  ordered  Jesus  to  be  scourged.  It  could  not  have  cost 
the  feelings  of  a  Pilate  much  to  inflict  such  violent  pain  and  deep  dis- 
grace upon  an  innocent  man.  He  thought  that  Jesus,  as  an  enthusiast, 
who  had  already  given  so  much  trouble,  deserved  scourging ;  and  he 
probably  expected  to  appease  the  rage  and  excite  the  sympathy  of  the 
multitude  by  the  infliction,  and  so,  perhaps,  to  succeed  in  saving  his 
life.  With  the  cruel  marks  upon  his  body,  the  Saviour  was  brought 
out,  in  the  attire  which  the  soldiers  had  put  upon  him  in  derision,  and 
set  before  the  people ;  when  Pilate,  having  declared  that  he  found  no 
guilt  in  him,  said,  "  Behold  the  man  .'"  ("  Can  it  be  believed  that  he 
would  wish  to  make  himself  king  ]")  The  sight  only  stimulated  their 
fanatical  rage ;  and,  with  unceasing  clamours,  they  demanded  his  cru- 
cifixion. Full  of  displeasure,  Pilate  said  to  them,  "  Take  ye  h'wi,  and 
crucify  him,  for  I  find  no  fault  in  him'''  The  Jews  knew  well  how  to 
understand  this ;  and,  as  their  political  accusation  had  failed,  they  had 
recourse  again  to  the  religious  one  :  "  We  have  a  law,  and  hy  our  la^v 
(confirmed  by  the  Roman  state)  he  ought  to  die,  because  he  made  him- 
self the  Son  of  God." 

Unsusceptible  as  Pilate  was  of  all  impressions  from  the  higher  life, 
unable  to  recognize  the  majesty  that  dwelt  in  that  lowly  form,  he  yet 
found  in  Christ's  demeanour  under  his  sufferings  something  peculiar 
and  inexplicable.  Moreover,  his  wife,*  troubled  by  fearful  dreams, 
sent  him  a  warning  to  "  Have  nothing  to  do  with  that  just  man.^'  And 
now,  in  addition  to  all  this,  he  was  told  that  Jesus  had  declared  him- 
self to  be  the  "Son  of  God,"  a  title  which  he  interpreted  according  to 
the  pagan  conceptions  of  the  "  Sons  of  the  Gods." 

§  288.  Liast  Conversation  of  Jesus  loith  Pilate. —  The  Sentence. 
The  transition  is  easy  from  infidelity,  springing  from  workllincss  and 
frivolity,  to  sudden  emotions  o^  superstition.  So  he  who  but  a  moment 
before  had  mockingly  asked  Christ,  "  What  is  truth  ?"  went  now,  in  a 
sudden  access  of  superstitious  fear,  and  inquired,  "  Whence  art  thou  ?" 
As  the  question  was  prompted  only  by  superstition  and  curiosity,  and 

"  According  to  the  Apocryphal  Gospel  of  Nicodemus  (c.  ii.),  and  later  accounts  (all  of 
which,  however,  probably  came  from  the  same  source),  she  was  t  proselyte  of  the  gate, 
5eoae6i'ii,  and  was  named  Proda  ( ThUo,  Cod.  Apocryph.,  i.,  520).  Judaism  had  found  its 
converts  particularly  among  the  female  sex. 


CALVARY.  417 

as  the  questioner  was  incapable  of  apprehending  Jesus  as  the  Son  of 
God  in  the  only  sense  in  which  he  wished  to  be  acknowledged  as  such, 
the  Saviour  made  no  reply.  Pilate,  in  astonishment,  renewed  his 
questions  :  "  Sj)eakcst  tliou  not  unto  me  ?  Ktioiccst  thou  not  that  I  have 
-power  to  crucify  thee,  and  have  power  to  release  thee  .?"  To  this  Jesus 
answered:  ''Thou  couldst  have  no  poiver  at  all  against  me,  except  it 
were  given  thee  from  above  (if  God  had  not  brought  it  to  pass  that  I 
should  be  delivered  to  thee  by  the  Sanhedrim) ;  therefore  is  the  guilt  of 
those  by  whom  God  hath  delivered  me  unto  thee  greater  than  thine." 

Thus  did  Christ  declare  that- no  human  will  limited  his  life,  but  that 
his  death  took  place  in  consequence  of  a  higher  necessity  ordained  by 
God,  for  a  higher  end.  Pilate  thereupon  strove  more  earnestly  to 
save  him ;  but  the  Jews  alarmed  him  with  the  cry,  so  terrible  at  that 
time,  of  crimen  majestatis :  "  If  thou  let  this  man  go,  thou  art  not  Cae- 
sar's friend  ;  whosoever  maketh  himself  a  king,  revolts  against  the  au- 
thority of  the  emperor."  To  this  storm  of  clamour  the  procurator  at 
last,  though  reluctantly,  yielded :  his  conscience  feared  the  charges 
which  the  Sanhedrim  might  prefer  against  him  at  Rome ;  and  his  per- 
sonal security  was  more  to  him  than  the  life  of  an  innocent  man. 

§  289.  Jcstis  led  to  Calvary. — Simon  of  Gyrene. —  The  Words  of  Christ 
to  the  Weeping  Women. 

As  was  usual  with  condemned  criminals,  Jesus  himself  carried  the 
instrument  of  death  to  the  place  of  execution.  But  his  severe  strug- 
gles and  sufferings,  both  of  body  and  mind,  had  so  exhausted  his 
sti-ength  that  he  sunk  under  the  burden.  Even  the  rude  soldiers,  who 
had  so  lately  mocked  him,  were  filled  with  compassion,  and  compelled 
a  Jew,  whom  they  met  on  the  way,  Simon  of  Cyrene,  to  take  his  cross 
and  bear  it  to  the  place  of  death.* 

Amid   all  his    sufferings   he  was   moved  with  compassion  for  the 

*  Thi.5  account,  given  in  the  first  three  Gospels?,  carries  the  proof  of  its  veracity  in  itself. 
It  is  nothing  .strange  that  Roman  soldiers,  in  the  puhlic  service,  could  do,  unresisted,  so 
high-hauded  an  act  (cf.  Hw/s  instructive  remarks  on  the  narrative  of  Christ's  passion, 
Zeitschrift  fur  d.  Geistl.  d.  Erzbistliunis  Freiburg,  1831,  v.,  s.  12).  Mark,  whose  account 
bears  evidence  in  this,  as  in  several  other  places,  of  peculiar  sources  of  information,  oral 
or  written,  mentions  (xv.,  21)  that  this  Simon  was  the  father  of  two  men  well  known  in  the 
first  Christian  congregations.  Notwithstanding  all  that  Sl)-nuss  says  to  the  contrary,  John's 
statement,  that  Jesus  was  led  bearing  his  own  cross,  is  not  at  variance  with  that  given  by 
the  other  sources,  viz.,  that  he  was  afterward  relieved  of  the  load  on  account  of  bis  ex- 
haustion. John  passes  lightly  over  some  things  in  the  narrative  of  Christ's  passion,  and 
gives  prominence  to  others  not  mentioned  by  the  otlier  Evangelists  ;  there  is,  therefore, 
no  ground  of  surprise  in  his  omission  of  this  particular  incident.  If  it  be  supposed  that  the 
Apostle  John  did  not  write  this  Gospel,  can  it  be  imagined  that  its  author  knew  nothing 
of  this  account  (for  a  doctrinal  motive  to  intentional  silence  is  out  of  the  question)  ?  In 
what  comer  must  he  have  written,  to  remain  ignorant  of  an  incident  so  closely  interwoven 
with  the  traditional  accounts  of  the  passion  ?  And  how  could  a  document  issuing  from 
such  a  corner  be  passed  off  as  the  production  of  John,  the  Apostle. 

Dd 


418  THE  CPvUCIFIXION. 

blinded  people,  over  whose  heads  he  saw  impending  the  judgments  of 
God,  called  down  by  their  long-accumulated  guilt,  of  which  he  had  so 
often  warned  them.  Seeing  the  women  of  Jerusalem  in  tears,*  he  said 
to  them,  "  Weep  not  for  me,  but  weep  for  yourselves  and  for  your 
children."  Tlien,  after  predicting  the  woes  of  the  siege  and  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem,  he  said,  "  If  they  do  these  things  in  a  green  tree,  what 
shall  be  done  in  the  dry  .?"t 


CHAPTER  VII. 

THE    CRUCIFIXION. 

§  290.    Details  of  the  Crucifixion. 

WHEN  Jesus  reached  the  place  of  execution,  he  was  offered,  as 
was  usual,  a  spiced  wine,|  intended  to  stupify  the  mind  and 
deaden  the  pains  of  death.  Oppressed  with  burning  thirst,  he  tasted 
f)f  the  wine  ;  but  when  he  perceived  the  stupifying  drug,  he  refused 
to  drink,  that  he  might  die  in  full  consciousness.  Stripped  of  nearly 
all  his  clothing, §  he  was  lifted  up  to  the  cross;  bound,  and  then  nailed 
to  it  by  his  hands  and  feet.||      (The  chief  pain  of  this  cruel  death, 

*  Luke,  xxiii.,  27-31. 

t  "  If  the  Holy  One,  entering  among  sinful  men,  is  so  entreated,  what  must  happen  to 
those  whose  sufl'erings  will  be  the  just  penalty  of  their  own  accumulated  guilt?" 

X  Matt.,  sxvii.,  34.  Mark  describes  it  exactly  (xv.,  i!3)  as  oiras  ianvpviantvoi.  Cf.  Acta 
Fructuosi  Tarraconensis,  where  it  is  related  of  the  martys,  "  Cum  mvlti  ex  fraterna  cnri- 
fate  Us  afferent,  uti  conditi  permixH  poculum  sumercnt,"  &c.  (c.  iii.,  Ruinart.,  Acta  Mar- 
tyrum,  Amstel.,  1713,  220).  The  merum  conditum  was  given  by  the  Cliristians  to  the  con- 
fessors tnnqitam  antidotum,  that,  by  means  of  it,  they  might  be  less  sensible  of  suffering 
(Tertnll.  de  Jejnniis,  c.  xii.). 

5  John's  mention  of  the  Xfw''  cip'paipos  is  confirmed  by  the  statement  of  Isidore  of  Pohi- 
sium,  that  such  garments  were  peculiar  to  Galilee.  Such  a  garment,  though  somewhat 
common  iu  Galilee,  and  worn  by  the  lower  classes,  might  have  been  a  novelty  to  the  Ho- 
man  soldiers,  and,  therefore,  an  object  of  value  in  their  eyes.  Isidore  says,  "  rij  Si  ayvoe'i 
rflv  EVTiXeiav  rris  iaOriTOS  iKtivris,  fincp  oi  ttt-uxo?  Kixpr/VTai  tSv  raAAai'wi',  aaO'  oi);  Kol  fui^tcra  tu 
TuiovTO  0iAa  yiVEtrSai  ii^iuTtnv,  rix^'fl  tivl,  iii  a'l  arrjOuhaplScS,  uvaKpovatov  V(j>aivi'/fmoi'." 

II  There  has  been  much  dispute  on  this  point,  and  many  have  given  it  undue  impor- 
tance ;  the  result  of  the  most  candid  inquiry  is,  that  the  feet  were  nailed  as  well  as  the 
hands.  The  most  striking  confirmation  is  afibrdcd  by  the  fact  that  the  fathers,  writing  at 
a  time  when  crucifixion  was  in  use,  speak  of  the  piercing  cf  Jesus's  feet  as  a  matter  of 
coarse,  without  laying  any  stress  upon  it  as  necessary  to  fulfil  Ps.  xxii.,  17.  We  cannot 
enter  into  the  inquiry  at  length,  but  will  only  allude  to  the  passage  in  Tertullian  so  impor- 
tant in  reference  to  this  question  (Adv.  Marcion.,  iii.,  19).  After  citing  "  fade  runt  maitus 
mens  et  pedes''  from  the  Psalm,  he  undertakes  to  show  that  it  was  fulfilled  in  the  crucifixion 
of  Christ.  The  words  immediately  following,  "qufe  proprie  atrocitas  crucis,"  can  mean 
nothing  else  than  that  it  was  the  piercing  of  the  hands  and  feet  which,  on  the  whole,  made 
this  punishment  of  death  so  terrible.  He  then  speaks  of  the  apices  crvcis  as  belonging  to 
the  cross  in  general,  not  Christ's  in  particular.  Further,  ho  says  that  the  Psalm  cannot  be 
applicil  to  any  other  that  had  died  as  a  martyr  among  the  Jews;  no  man  of  God  cxeejjt 
Christ  had  suiFered  this  mode  of  death,  "  qui  solus  a  popnlo  tarn  insignitcr  criicijixns  esC 
(who  suffered  so  marked  a  death  by  crucifixion — one  otherwise  unknown  in  the  Old  Testa- 


THE  TWO  THIEVES.  419 

according  to  a  writer  who  lived  while  it  was  yet  known  and  used, 
consisted  in  the  hanging  of  the  body  while  the  hands  and  feet  were 
nailed.) 

§  291.  Christ  Prays  for  his  Enemies. —  The  Two  Thieves. 
When  he  was  fastened  to  the  cross,  amid  the  jeers  and  scoffs  of  the 
carnal  multitude,  He  did  not  invoke  the  Divine  judgments  upon  the 
heads  of  those  who  had,  returning  evil  for  good,  inflicted  such  terrible 
tortures  upon  him  ;  on  the  contrary,  with  boundless  love,*  he  com- 
mended his  enemies  to  the  mercy  of  God,  praying,  "  Father,  forgive 
them,  for  they  know  not  what  they  do'"'  (the  ignorance  of  delusion, 
though  a  guilty  one). 

Two  criminals,  of  widely  opposite  dispositions,  wei"e  crucified  with 
him.  While  the  one,  hardened  in  sin,  joined  in  mocking  Christ,  the 
other  rebuked  him  for  so  doing.  Perhaps  the  men's  offences  had  been 
different ;  the  one  may  have  been  a  common  robber,  the  other  a  crim- 
inal led  away  by  the  political  passions  that  then  excited  the  nation — 
like  the  Sicarii,\  the  tools  of  the  hierarchy ;  but  on  this  question  we 
have  no  light.  At  any  rate,  one  of  them,  roused  to  a  sense  of  sin  and 
guilt,  became  susceptible  of  higher  impressions.  And  the  deeper  his 
consciousness  that  his  own  punishment  was  justly  dae  to  his  crimes,  the 
more  deeply  must  he  have  been  affected  by  the  sufferings  of  the  Holy 
One  beside  him.  Who  can  reckon  the  power  of  a  Divine  impression 
upon  a  contrite  soul — a  soul  freed  from  the  bonds  of  sense  by  imme- 
diate sufferings  ] 

It  is  at  once  a  proof  as  well  of  the  Divine  life  manifested  by  Christ 
in  the  very  face  of  death,  as  oi  the  religious  susceptibility  of  the  crim- 
inal himself,  that  he,  who  bad  perhaps  before  seen  none  of  the  proofs 
of  Christ's  majesty,  shouid  have  anticipated  the  faith  even  of  Apostles  ; 
and  this  he  did  in  tra-npHng  upon  Jewish  prejudices,  and  recognizing 
the  Messiah  in  the  sufferer.  "Z/or^,"  said  he,  "remember  me  lohen 
thou  comcst  into  thy  kingdom."  The  ansv/er  of  Christl  is  fiill  of  im- 
port in  more  respects  than  one.  In  view  of  the  sinner's  faith,  founded 
on  genuine  repentance,  he  promises  him  bliss ;  and  in  opposition  to 
the  expectation  that  His  kingdom  was  only  to  be  founded  in  the  future, 
he  promises  him  immediate  bliss  :  "  Verily,  I  say  unto  thee,  to-day  shalt 
thou  he  with  me  in  Paradise,"^ 

ment — defiuiug  him,  before  all  others,  and  fixing  him  alone  as  the  one  to  whom  the  worjs 
of  the  Psahn  could  be  applied).  Cf  Hu^'s  Dissertation,  before  cited;  Hase's  Leben  Jesu, 
§  143.  *  Thus  illustrating  practically  his  precepts  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount. 

t  As  Barabbas,  Luke,  xxiii.,  19. 

X  Its  contradiction  to  ordinary  Jewish  notions  proves  its  originality. 

§  A  symbolical  name  for  the  regions  of  bliss. 


422  THE  RESURRECTION. 

of  Holies  in  heaven  is  opened  to  all  men  through  the  finished  work  of 
Christ ;  the  wall  of  partition  between  the  Divine  and  the  Human 
broken  down ;  and  a  spiritual  worship  substituted  for  an  outward  and 
sensible  one. 


CHAPTER  VHI. 

THE    RESURRECTION. 


§  294.  Did  Christ  predict  his  Resurrection? 

BEFORE  describing  the  Resurrection,  we  must  examine  the  ques- 
tion whether  Christ  foresaw  and  predicted  uiat  event  as  well  as 
his  sufferings. 

It  is  true,  we  cannot  prove,  a  priori,  that  he  must  necessarily  have 
foreknown  the  Resurrection.  If  he  had  had  only  a  confident  certainty 
that  the  Holy  Spii-it  would  continue  to  work  in  his  disciples,  unfolding 
the  truth  He  had  taught  them,  and  completing  the  training  He  had  com- 
menced, he  might  have  left  behind  him  his  work  on  earth  with  calm 
assurance  of  the  future  ;  He  need  not  necessarily  have  concluded  that 
his  corporeal  reappearance  to  his  followers  in  so  short  a  time  must  form 
the  link  of  connexion  between  his  departure  and  the  renewal  of  spir- 
itual communion  with  them.  Notwithstanding  all  this,  however,  the 
close  connexion  of  Christ's  resurrection  with  his  whole  work  as  Re- 
deemer must,  in  the  outset,  make  it  appear  altogether  improbable  that 
he  should  not  have  foreknown  it. 

"But  if  he  looked  forwai'd  to,  his  resurrection  with  full  confidence, 
how  can  we  account  for  his  conflicts  at  the  apprbach  of  death  ?"  Here 
is  the  same  enigma  of  the  union  of  Divinity  and  Humanity  which  per- 
vade the  whole  life  of  Christ,  and  is  especially  prominent  at  particular* 
moments.  Phenomena  somewhat  analogous  appear  in  the  coexisting 
emotions  of  the  Divine  and  the  natural  life  in  believers  imbued  with 
the  Spii'it  of  Christ.  The  consciousness,  in  Him,  that  death  was  but  a 
passage  to  his  glorification  did  not  prevent  the  strivings  of  nature  with 
Bufferings ;  nor  could  the  assurance  of  speedy  resurrection  save  him 
from  the  struggle.  All  that  we  can  do  is  to  distinguish  the  separate 
moments  of  his  consciousness ;  remembering  that  faith  is  not  one  with 

things.  In  the  Evang.  ad  Hehrteos,  it  is  related  that  a  beam  over  the  Temple-door  broke 
in  two  (superliminare  lempli  infinittE  magniludinia  fractuvi  esse  atqni  divisum.  See  Hie- 
ron.  in  Matt.,  xxvii.,  T)! ;  torn,  vii.,  pt.  1,  p.  336,  ed.  Vallars) ;  which  might  have  been  caused 
by  the  earthcjuake.  Cf.,  also,  the  statement  cited  from  the  Gcmara  (in  Hush's  Dissertation 
above  mentioned),  that  the  folding-doors  of  the  Temple,  though  looked,  suddenly  hurst  open 
about  40  years  before  the  dcstnictioD  of  Jerusalem.  All  these  accounts  hint  at  some  fact 
lying  at  the  bottom  of  them. 


DID  CHRIST  FOREKNOW  IT?  423 

intuition.*  The  sacrifice  of  Christ  lost  as  little  of  its  moral  import  by 
the  assurance  of  resurrection  as  does  the  self-sacrifice  of  the  believer 
who  submits  to  the  death-struggle  in  faith  of  a  blissful  life  beyond. 

But  can  it  be  proved  that  Christ  fredicted  his  resurrection  to  the 
disciples  ]  May  they  not,  at  a  later  period,  have  attributed  such  an 
import  to  figurative  expressions  of  his,  like  those  in  John,  which,  in 
reality,  only  referred  to  his  sjnritual  manifestations  to  them ;  as  was 
done  with  Matt.,  xii.,  40,  and  John,  ii.,  19  ] 

Even  if  we  grant  that  this  may  have  been  the  case  with  some  of 
Christ's  expressions  of  the  kind,  it  by  no  means  follows  that  all  the 
intimations  of  the  resurrection  were  applied  in  this  way  only  at  a  later 
period.  The  very  fact  that  some  of  his  sayings  really  did  intimate  it 
may  have  led  to  the  attributing  of  this  meaning  to  others  that  did  not. 
In  John,  XX.,  8,  9,  we  see  an  indication  that  the  disciples,  soon  after 
his  death,  began  to  call  to  mind  what  he  had  said  concerning  his  resur- 
rection, and  hope  began  to  struggle  with  fear  in  their  souls.  But  John 
has  preserved  to  us  one  of  Christ's  sayings  which  plainly  points  to  his 
lesurrection,  viz.,  x.,  17, 18.  It  is  obvious  that  the  declaration,  "  IJiave 
power  to  lay  down  my  life,  and  1  have  foiocr  to  tahe  it  up  again,'^  was 
meant  to  imply  something  distinctive  and  peculiar  to  Christ;  it  is 
entirely  emasculated  by  being  applied  to  that  immortality  which  is 
common  to  all  men ;  nor  can  it  be  satisfied  except  by  reference  to  his 
resurrection.  There  are  passages  in  the  synoptical  Gospels  {e.g.,  Matt., 
xvi.,  21  ;  Luke,  ix.,  22)  in  which  Chiist  expressly  foretells  his  resurrec- 
tion, along  with  his  sufferings,  specifying  the  precise  interval  of  three 
days  ;  but  it  is  marvellous  that  these  precise  declarations  should  neither 
have  been  understood  nor  made  the  subject  of  direct  inquiry,  often  as 
they  were  repeated.  This  appears  unhistorical ;  indeed,  it  is  a  thing 
to  be  looked  for  that  tradition  would  give  to  such  expressions,  after 
the  event,  when  their  bearing  was  better  understood,  a  more  precise 
form  than  they  really  had  at  first.  In  John's  Gospel  all  Christ's  inti- 
mations are  distant  and  indefinite,  as  is  usual  in  prophecy ;  and  this  is 
one  of  the  proofs  of  its  genuine  Apostolic  origin. 

§  295.  Dejection  of  the  Apostles  immediately  after  Christ's  Death. — 
Their  Joy  and  Activity  at  a  later  Period. —  The  Reappearance  of 
Christ  necessary  to  explain  the  Change. 

The  death  of  Christ  annihilated  at  a  stroke  the  Messianic  expecta- 
tions of  the  Apostles.  Their  dejection  was  complete.  But  if,  of  all 
that  they  had  hoped,  nothing  was  ever  realized,  this  dejection  could 
not  have  passed  away.  It  is  true,  we  may  suppose  it  abstractly  pos- 
sible that,  after  the  first  consternation  was  over,  the  deep,  spiritual 

*  Christ  is  represented,  Heb.,  xii.,  2,  as  leading  the  way  for  believers,  by  himself  reach- 
ing his  glory  through  a  perfectly  tried  faith. 


424  THE  RESURRECTION. 

impressions  which  Christ  had  made  might  have  revived,  and  operated 
more  powerfully,  and  even  more  purely,  now  that  they  could  no  longer 
see  him  with  their  bodily  eyes.  But  this  view  could  not  arise  except 
along  with  the  recognition  of  a  historical  Christ  as  the  personal  ground 
and  cause  of  such  a  new  spiritual  creation  ;  without  the  presupposition 
of  such  a  Christ  there  is  no  possible  foundation  on  which  to  conceive 
of  such  after- workings. 

And  even  %cWt  it,  we  cannot  explain  (not  bare  conceivable  possibili- 
ties, but)  the  actual  state  of  the  case,  viz.,  the  dejection  of  the  Apostles 
;\X.Jirst,  and  what  they  were  and  did  afterward.  There  must  be  some 
intermediate  historical  fact  to  explain  the  ti-ansition ;  something  must 
have  occurred  to  revive,  with  new  power,  the  almost  effaced  impres- 
sion ;  to  bring  back  the  flow  of  their  faith  which  had  so  far  ebbed 
away.  The  reappearance,  then,  of  Christ  among  his  disciples  is  a 
connecting  link  in  the  chain  of  events  which  cannot  possibly  be  spared. 
It  acted  thus  :  Their  sunken  faith  in  his  promises  received  a  new  im- 
pulse when  these  promises  wei'e  repeated  by  Him,  risen  from  the 
dead ;  his  reappearance  formed  the  point  of  contact  for  a  new  spir- 
itual communion  with  him,  never  to  be  dissolved,  nay,  thenceforward 
to  be  developed  ever  more  and  more.  According  to  their  own  unvary- 
ing asseverations,  it  wa^  the  foundation  of  their  immovable  faith  in 
his  person,  and  in  himself  as  Messiah  and  Son  of  God,  as  well  as  of 
their  steadfast  hope,  in  his  communion,  of  a  blissful,  everlasting  life, 
triumphing  over  death.  Without  it  they  never  could  have  had  that  in- 
spiring assurance  of  faith  with  which  they  every  where  testified  of  what 
they  had  received,  and  joyfully  submitted  to  tortures  and  to  death. 

§  296.    Was  the  Reappeara7ice  of'Christ  a  Vision  ? 

If,  then,  it  be  the  task  of  history  to  connect  the  course  of  events,  the 
reappearance  of  Christ  must  be  recognized  as  an  essential  link  in  the 
chain  which  brought  about  the  spiritual  renovation  of  the  life  of  human- 
ity. Without  it,  the  historical  inquirer  will  always  have  an  inexplica- 
ble enigma  to  solve.  But  reason,  which  demands  this  connexion  of 
events,  feels  itself — until  it  has  obtained  a  higher  light  by  faith — re- 
pelled by  a  supernatural  event,  not  to  be  explained  from  the  connexion 
itself.  And  the  inquirer  who  does  not  recognize  (as  we  felt  ourselves 
compelled  to  do  at  the  outset)  the  whole  manifestation  of  Christ  as 
supernatural,  must  set  himself  to  the  task  of  finding  some  natural  expla- 
nation of  his  reappearance,  in  the  connexion  of  cause  and  effect. 

Those  who  attempt  such  an  explanation  on  internal  grounds  sup- 
pose Christ's  reappearance  to  have  been  a  vision.  Now  in  any  vision 
(other  than  magical,  aiid  such  are  precluded  by  the  hypothesis  of  this 
inquiry,  which  goes  upon  natural  and  historical  grounds)  a  psycholog- 
ical starting-point  is  necessarily  presupposed,  even  when  the  vision  is 


REALITY  OF  CHRIST'S  DEATH.  425 

said  to  be  seen  by  one  individual,  much  more  when  it  is  repeatedly 
seen,  in  the  same  way,  by  different  individuals.  But  no  such  startino^- 
point  can  be  found  in  the  mental  condition  of  the  Apostles,  such  as  it 
has  been  described.  It  is  precisely  in  order  to  explain  the  change  in 
that  condition  that  we  need  another  cause.  How  is  it  possible  to  de- 
rive from  the  psychological  developement  itself  a  condition  precisely  its 
contrary]      That  were  indeed  q.  j^ctitio  2>i'incipii. 

Moreover,  the  very  nature  of  the  Evangelical  nan-atives,  bearing,  as 
they  do,  the  stamp  of  sensible  reality,  subverts  such  a  hypothesis. 
And  to  these  must  be  added  the  concurrent  testimony  of  a  contempo- 
rary, who  himself  came  forward  within  a  very  few  years  as  a  witness 
for  the  reality  of  Christ's  resurrection,  whose  personality  lies  before 
us,  in  his  letters,  in  all  the  ti'aits  of  undeniable  historical  reality,  and 
whose  convictions,  founded  on  that  resurrection,  gave  him  power  to 
encounter  cheerfully  all  perils,  labours,  and  sufferings — the  Apostle 
Paul.  And  Paul  bears  witness  that  Christ  appeared  to  more  than 
five  hundred  at  one  time.* 

§  297.    Was  Christ's  a  real  Death  ? 

If  the  inquirer  still  perseveres  in  rejecting  every  thing  supernatural, 
he  must  have  recourse  to  external  grounds  for  the  explanation  of 
Christ's  reappearance,  and  deem  it  a  revival  from  apparent  death, 
brought  about  by  the  use  of  natui'al  means. 

It  may  be  admitted,  inasmuch  as  crucifixion  was  not  immediately 
fatal,  that  one  who  had  endured  its  torture  for  several  hours  might  be 
restored  by  careful  medical  aid  ;  although  it  certainly  was  not  an  easy 
thing  to  do,  as  the  examples  mentioned  by  Josephust  testify.  But  let 
us,  without  inquiring  for  other  signs  of  death  in  the  case  of  Jesus,  no- 
tice the  following  points.  Before  his  crucifixion,  he  had  endured  mul- 
tiplied sufferings,  both  of  soul  and  body ;  he  had  been  scoui-ged  ;  he 
was  so  worn  out  on  the  way  to  Golgotha  that  he  could  not  carry  his 
cross,  and  even  the  Roman  soldiers  had  pity  on  him  ;  he  was  nailed 
to  the  cross  by  his  hands  and  feet;  he  had  remained  from  noon  till 
towards  evening|  in  this  painful  position,  under  the  rays  of  a  burning 

*  1  Cor.,  XV.,  6. 

t  In  his  autobiography,  $  75.  He  had  been  sent,  with  a  troop  of  Roman  horse,  to  the 
village  of  Tekoah,  four  or  five  hours  distant,  to  reconnoitre.  Jerome,  living  in  Bethlehem, 
writes  of  this  village,  "Thecoam  viculum  esse  in  monte  situm  et  duodecim  millibus  ab 
Jerosolymis  separatum,  quotidie  oculis  cernimus"  (t.  iv.,  pt.  i.,  p.  882).  Returning  from  the 
village  to  Jerusalem,  Josephus  saw  several  prisoners  hanging  on  crosses,  who  must  have 
been  crucified  in  the  interim,  as  he  had  not  seen  them  in  going  out.  On  arriving  at  camp, 
he  begged  of  Titus  the  lives  of  three,  and  had  them  at  once  taken  down  (after  hanging, 
therefore,  but  a  few  hours),  and  treated,  medically,  with  the  utmost  care;  yet  but  one  out 
of  the  three  survived.  (Cf.  Brelschneider's  remarks  on  this  account,  Stud.,  u.  Krit.,  1832, 
iii. ;  also.  Hug,  Freiburg.  Zeit.'!chrift,  No.  vii.,  148.) 

X  A  close  computation  of  the  hours  cannot  be  arrived  at  from  the  Evangelical  accounts. 
It  is  hardly  to  be  supposed  that  even  the  disciples  who  were  eye-witnesses  were  able, 
under  the  circumstances,  to  note  the  precise  time. 


426  THE  RESURHECTION. 

sun  ;  he  took  leave  of  the  world  in  the  struggles  of  death  ;  his  side  was 
pierced*  by  the  lance  of  a  Roman  soldier ;  and,  after  all  this,  he  re- 
mained two  nights  and  a  day  in  a  fresh  grave.  Yet,  without  medical 
aid  or  attendance,  ilie  same  man  walks  about  on  a  sudden  among  his 
disciples,  apparently  in  sound  health  and  full  of  vital  power !  Had 
he  appeared  among  them  sick  and  suffering,  as  he  must  have  done  had 
he  been  restored  by  natural  means  from  apparent  death,  such  a  sight 
could  not  have  revived  their  sunken  faith,  or  become  the  foundation 
for  all  their  hopes.  A  weak  man  would  have  reappeared,  subject  to 
death  like  any  other.  But,  on  the  contrary,  he  seemed  to  them  so 
much  more  like  a  glorified  being  that  he  had  to  give  them  sensible 
proofs  of  his  humanity.  He  appeared  to  them  thenceforth  as  one 
over  whom  death  had  no  power ;  and,  therefore,  became  a  pledge  that 
the  life  of  man  should  conquer  death  and  enjoy  forever  a  glorified  ex- 
istence. 

Even  if  all  this  could  be  made  to  agree  with  a  restoration  of  Christ 
by  natural  means  from  apparent  death,  we  should  have  further  to  sup- 
pose either  that  his  life  was  subsequently  prolonged  for  some  time,  or 
that  he  died  soon  after  in  consequence  of  his  wounds  and  sufferings. 
The  former  supposition  is  a  mere  fancy ;  there  is  no  possible  ground 
for  it  in  history ;  the  latter  is  contradicted  by  the  facts  of  his  reappear- 
ance ;  there  was  no  cause  of  death  apparent.  And  the  very  fact  of 
his  dying  would  have  destroyed  all  the  moral  effect  of  his  resurrection, 
which  consisted  solely  in  the  conviction  wrought  by  it  that  he,  as  Mes- 

*  I  make  the  following  remarks  with  reference  to  John,  xix.,  31,  to  guard  against  the 
interpolations  placed  in  this  passage  by  a  profane  vulgarity,  which  reads  John's  Gospel  as 
it  would  a  police  report.  The  suffnngcre.  crura  was  indeed  an  ignominious  pauishment, 
particularly  used  as  a  capital  punishment  for  slaves ;  but  it  certainly  was  not  immediately 
fatal.  (After  the  hands  were  cut  off,  the  legs  broken,  and  the  body  maimed  in  various 
ways,  the  criminals  were  thrust  into  a  pit,  still  alive :  KoXcfiuio-aiTEf  ^f  km  cvvrpiipavTCi  ru 
cKih},  h-i  ?u^'^Gf  cpptij.ai'  £^5  Tiva  ra-ppov.  Polyb.,  i.,  c.  80,  §  13.)  The  death-blow  was  after- 
ward given  in  some  other  way.  Hence  (Ammian.  Marcellin.,  Hist.,  xiv.,  9)  it  is  expressly 
added,  "  fractis  crnribus,  occidnnlur."  The  soldiers,  having  completed  the  effractio  crv- 
ruin  on  the  two  malefactors  that  were  crucified  with  Jesus,  either  gave  them  the  death- 
blow or  permitted  them,  after  being  taken  down,  to  perish  slowly  from  their  broken  limbs. 
But,  as  no  signs  of  life  could  be  seen  in  Jesus,  they  saw  no  necessity  to  execute  the  com- 
mand, which  was  given  solely  under  the  presuj)position  that  crucifixion  could  not  kill  s<) 
soon.  Nor  was  this  at  all  strange ;  all  that  was  demaaded  was  that  the  crucifixion  should 
have  done  its  work  effectually.  They  deemed  it  enough,  therefore,  to  tlinjst  the  lance  into 
his  side,  either  to  assure  themselves  that  he  was  dead,  or  to  give  him  the  death-blow.  It 
would  have  been  a  bad  manoeuvre,  indeed,  to  do  this  as  a  mere  pretence,  with  the  inten 
tion  to  save  him.  Although  the  word  vvrrav  may  denote  a  slight  wound,  its  meaning  (as 
denoting  a  severe  wound)  is  fixed  by  the  weapon  employed;  and,  moreover,  John  uses  it 
as  synonymous  with  ikkivtcXv,  v.  37.  The  wonnd  could  not  have  been  a  small  one,  as  Christ 
afterward  called  on  the  disciples  to  thrust  their  hands  into  it.  And  there  are  other  instan- 
ces in  which  we  read  of  the  denth-blow  being  given  by  piercing  the  side  with  a  lauce  ; 
two  martyrs,  Marcus  and  Marcellianus,  had  remained  a  day  and  a  night  tied  to  a  stake,  to 
which  their  feet  were  nailed,  ju.tsit  pra-fcclus  ambos,  ubi  stabant,  lanccis  per  kitcra  perfo- 
ran  (Acta  Sauct.,  Juu.,  t.  iii.,  f.  571). 


REALITY  OF  CHRIST'S  DEATH.  427 

eiah,  had  conquered  death,  and  was  no  more  subject  to  its  power. 
Moreover,  if  it  be  true  that  Christ's  sufferings  caused  his  death,  he  is 
chargeable  with  grossly  deceiving  the  disciples  to  present  his  body  to 
them  in  a  higher  light,  and  thereby  give  an  impulse  to  their  faith  which 
it  could  not  otherwise  have  obtained.  And  so  that  great  fact  which 
formed  the  immovable  basis  of  the  disciples'  faith  in  Christ's  person 
and  work,  and  in  his  plan  of  salvation,  on  which  rests  the  whole  fabric 
of  the  Christian  Church,  must  have  gained  its  high  import  from  an  ac- 
tual deception  on  the  part  of  Christ  himself,  or  at  least  from  an  inten- 
tional concealment  of  the  truth  ! 

Had  the  Jewish  opponents  of  the  Gospel  made  use  of  this  hypothe- 
sis to  invalidate  the  proof  of  Divinity  which  the  disciples  derived  from 
Christ's  reappearance,  and  circulated  it  freely,  it  would  neither  be  mat- 
ter of  surprise  nor  ground  of  suspicion.  But  the  fact  that  they  did 
not  make  use  of  any  such  hypothesis,  but  employed  any  and  every 
other  means  to  invalidate  the  Christian  faith,  is  a  powerful  proof  that 
there  was  nothing  in  the  circumstances  of  Christ's  death  to  favour 
such  an  explanation.  Of  a  totally  diiferent  character  was  the  report, 
so  easily  diflflised,*  that  the  disciples  had  found  means  to  remove  the 
body  from  the  grave.  The  invention  and  circulation  of  such  a  report 
was  most  natural ;  the  empty  grave  was  a  proof  that  must  be  invalida- 
ted. But,  on  the  other  hand,  there  is  not  a  vestige  of  proof  that  the 
Jews,  presupposing  the  accounts  of  Christ's  reappearance  to  be  true, 
ever  reported  that  he  had  been  revived  from  a  merely  apparent  death: 
on  the  contrary,  the  truth  of  those  accounts  was  the  object  of  attack 
from  the  very  first.  The  opponents  of  Christianity  declared  that  the 
disciples  either  intentionally  deceived  others,  or  were  themselves  de- 
ceived ;  e.  g.,  Celsus,  who  made  great  use  of  the  attacks  of  the  Jews 
upon  Christianity  and  the  fables  they  spread  abroad  concerning  it. 
And  in  this  connexion  it  was  that  the  accusation  of  stealing  away  the 
body  was  brought  against  the  disciples  ;  they  did  it,  it  was  said,  to  nul- 
lify the  evidence  of  the  corpse  against  their  pretence\  that  Christ  had 
risen  and  reappeared  to  them.  Paul  did  not  find  it  necessary  to  prove 
that  Christ  had  really  died  ;  this  was  taken  for  granted  ;  his  task  was 
to  show  that  he  had  risen  from  the  dead  (1  Cor.,  xv.).| 

*  Matt.,  xxvili.,  15.  We  cannot  mistake  the  ailditions  of  tradition  to  the  original  facts. 
Dial.  c.  Tryph.  Jud.,  f.  335,  ed.  Colon,  and  tlie  extracts  by  Eif:enmeng-er,  i.,  192. 

t   L.  C,  Justin  Mart.  :   "  Tt'Kavuiai  tovs  avdpdvovi  AtyovreS  lyrjyipOai." 

t  Bat  I  must  believe,  contrary  to  some  of  tlie  latest  interpreters,  that  John  (xix.,  34),  as 
an  eye-witness,  meant  to  prove  that  Christ  was  really  dead,  from  the  nature  of  the  blood 
that  flowed  from  the  wound.  Ver.  35  certainly  refers  to  ver.  34,  and  not  to  ver.  36,  37. 
Althoush  John,  in  these  last  verses,  referred  to  the  Old  Testament  prophecy,  it  docs  not 
follow  that  he  made  it  the  seal  of  faith  (v.  34),  particularly /o7-  his  readers,  who  were  not  sucli 
as  to  be  led  to  faith  from  arguments  founded  in  Judaism.  These  verses  are  added  to  show 
that  what  had  taken  place  was  conformed  to  a  higher  necessity.  It  appears,  then,  that  John 
thought  it  necessarj'  to  prove  that  Christ  had  really  died.     It  docs  not  follow,  however,  that 


428  THE  RESURRECTION. 

§  298.    The  liesiirrection  intended  only  for  Believers. 

The  manifestation  of  the  risen  Saviour  was  only  designed  for  those 
who  had  been  brought  to  faith  by  his  jjrevious  ministry.  It  was  not 
one  of  the  miracles  by  which  unbelievers  were  to  be  convinced.  Those 
whose  dispositions  of  heart  had  made  them  unsusceptible  of  impres- 
sion from  his  whole  ministry  would  have  received,  for  the  same  reason, 
but  transient  impressions  from  his  reappearance.  If  the  living  Jesus 
could  not  lead  them  to  repent,  neither  would  they  have  been  persuaded 
by  one  risen  from  the  dead.* 

The  reappearance  of  the  risen  one,  therefore,  was  designed  to  seal 
and  confirm  the  faith  of  such  as  already  believed  ;  to  form  the  point  of 
transition  from  their  sensible  communion  with  the  visible  Christ  to  their 
spiritual  fellowship  with  the  invisible,  but  ever-present  Saviour.  And 
as  this  was  the  reason  why  Chiist  did  not,  in  his  last  promises  recorded 
by  John,  make  expi'ess  mention  of  his  reappearance  as  a  preparatory 
moment,  so  we  shall  find  in  his  conversations  with  the  disciples  after 
the  resurrection  conspicuous  allusions  to  the  promises  made  before. 
Here,  too,  we  find  the  reason  why  he  only  appeared  to  them  occasion- 
ally, and  remained  among  them  but  a  short  time ;  they  were  not  to  ac- 
custom themselves  anew  to  cleave  to  his  visible  manifestation,  but  to 
learn  that  his  reappearance  was  to  mediate  a  higher  and  everlasting 
union.t 

§  299.    The  Women,  Peter,  and  John  at  the  Grave. 
We  now  proceed  to  a  brief  statement  of  the  details  of  the  resur- 
rection. 

On  Sunday  morning,  the  second  day  of  Easter,  Mary  of  Magdalene, 
with  certain  other  women,  came  to  the  tomb,  and  found  the  stone  re- 
moved. They  began  to  fear  that  the  body  had  been  taken  away,  and 
that  they  should  see  it  no  more.  Mary,  in  alarm,  ran  to  seek  for  John 
and  Peter ;  the  other  women  afterward  went  to  other  of  the  Apostles. 
Peter  and  John  hastened  to  the  tomb.  John,  in  anxious  haste,  antici- 
pated Peter.  Looking  down  into  the  tomb,  and  seeing  the  shroud  de- 
he  had  in  view  any  definite  opponents  who  denied  that  fact.  As  he  intended  to  testify  to 
the  resurreciioii,  it  was  necessary  tliat  he  should  testify  to  the  death,  especially  for  readers 
who  were  not  believers ;  in  view  of  the  well-knowo  fact  that  crucifixion,  endured  for  a  few 
hours,  was  not  in  itself  always  fatal.  If  he  had  definite  opponents  in  view,  they  were 
probably  (con'espoudiug  to  John's  sphere  of  labour)  heathens,  and  not  Jews. 

*  Luke,  xvi.,  31 ;  cf  p.  136,  322. 

t  I  agree  with  De  IVette,  against  Lucke,  that  John,  xx.,  30,  docs  not  refer  to  other  ap- 
pearances of  ChrLst  after  the  resurrection  not  mentioned  by  John,  but  that  it  is  intended  as 
a  word  of  conclusion  to  his  whole  Gospel.  This  is  supported  by  the  whole  form  of  the  ex- 
pression, and  by  the  use  of  the  words  arjixtia  ttoiuv,  which  cannot  mean  any  thing  but  "  to 
work  miracles."  The  phrase  cviimuv  rdiv  liaOiinov  proves  nothing  to  the  contrary  ;  the  Apos- 
tles were  eyewitnesses  of  Christ's  whole  ministry ;  and  John  wrote  his  Gospel  as  one  of 
these  eye-witnesses. 


APPEARANCES  OF  CHRIST.  429 

cently  disposed,  but  no  corpse  there,  he  started  back  in  consternation. 
Peter,  taking  courage,  descended  into  the  tomb ;  John  followed  ;  and, 
now  convinced  that  the  body  was  not  there,  called  to  mind*  the  inti- 
mations which  Christ  had  givent  of  his  resurrection,  and  faith  began  to 
spring  up  in  his  soul. 

§  300.  Christ  appears  to  the  Women  at  the  Tomb;  to  Manj ;  to  the 
two  Disciples  on  the  Way  to  Eminaus. 
During  the  absence  of  the  Apostles,  Christ  appeared  first  to  the  two 
women  who  had  gone  away ;  and  they,  filled  with  joy,  surprise,  fear, 
and  reverence,  fell  before  him  and  embraced  his  feet.  But  he  spoke 
to  them  encouragingly  :  "  Be  not  afraid.''''  All  that  he  said  was  en- 
couraging and  cheering ;  and  in  bidding  them  announce  his  resurrec- 
tion to  the  Apostles,  he  spoke  of  them  as  "  hrctlirenr\ 

He  then  appeared  to  Mary,  who  had  remained  at  the  tomb  oppressed 
with  anxiety  and  grief  Seeing  him  so  unexpectedly,  in  the  morning 
twilight,  she  did  not  at  first  recognize  him.  But  when  he  called  her 
by  name,  she  knew  at  once  the  well-accustomed  voice.  With  an 
exclamation  of  joy  she  turned  and  (probably)  stretched  out  her  hands 
towards  him.  But  Jesus  bade  her  not  to  grasp  him  :  "  Touch  me  not, 
for  I  am  not  yet  ascended  to  my  Father ;  hut  go  to  my  hrcthrcn,  and 
say  mito  thevi,  '  I  ascend  icnto  my  Father  and  your  Father,  to  my  God 
and  your  God.'  "§  This  obscure  saying  obviously  refers  to  the  last 
discourses  reported  by  John,  and  cannot  be  understood  apart  from 
them.  We  know  he  had  promised  the  disciples  that,  after  ascending 
to  the  Father,  he  would  return  and  remain  with  them  forever.  Now 
he  had  returned ;  and  they  might  deem  this  to  be  the  return  which  he 
had  promised,  and  expect  him  to  remain  with  them  thenceforth  in  the 
same  form.  He  cautioned  them  against  so  misunderstanding  the 
promise  as  to  cleave  to  him  in  the  form  in  which  he  then  appeared, 
because  he  had  not  "  yet  ascended  to  the  Father."  After  that  event, 
when  he  should  manifest  himself  as  the  glorified  one,  were  they  to 
embrace  him  wholly ;    obviously  not  in  a  natural,  but  in  a  spiritual 

*'  The  word  hiarivntv  (John,  xx.,  8)  mast  be  refen'cd  to  a  previous  fortelling  of  tlie  fes- 
uiTection  by  Christ  himself,  in  acconiance  with  John's  usage  of  the  idea  of  "belief,"  as 
Lucke  has  admitted  (Commentar,  'i\^  Aufl.).  The  sense  of  the  passage  is  as  follows  :  The 
disciples  needed  such  an  outward  sign  to  revive  their  faith  in  Christ's  predictions  of  his 
resurrection ;  for  they  were  not  as  yet  penetrated  by  the  conviction  that  Jesus,  as  Mes- 
siah, had  necessarily  to  rise  in  order  to  accomplish  the  Messianic  woi-k  according  to  the 
prophecies  of  Scripture.  Had  they  been,  they  would  have  needed  no  such  external  per- 
ception.    (Cf.  Liicke's  excellent  remarks  on  the  passage.)  t  Cf  p.  423. 

i  Matt.,  xxviii.,  10. 

6  The  word  a-KTuOai  (John,  xx.,  17)  means  not  only  a  momentary'  touching,  but  to  seize, 
to  grasp.  It  can,  al.so,  be  applied  to  the  embracing  of  an  object  that  one  intends  to  retain 
hold  of;  and  of  the  beginning  of  a  continued  occupation  with  any  subject. 


430  THE  RESURRECTION, 

sense.*  His  stay  in  liis  then  form  was  to  be  but  transient ;  only  after 
his  ascension  could  he  remain  permanently,  and  that  in  another  form.t 
Therefore,  he  did  not  commission  Mary  to  announce  his  sensible  com- 
ing, but  his  ascension  to  the  Father,  and  his  subsequent  revelation  to 
them ;  making  no  mention  of  the  intermediate  and  brief  manifestation 
that  was  only  to  prepare  the  way  for  the  higher  and  permanent  one. 
The  words  "  my  brethren,  my  Father,  my  God,  your  God,"  served  to 
remind  them  of  the  promise  in  his  last  discourses,  viz.,  that  they, 
through  Him,  should  enter  into  a  special  relation  to  the  Father,  whom 
He,  in  a  sense  peculiarly  his  own,  could  call  "  His  Father"  and  "  His 
God ;"  that  they  should,  in  communion  with  Him,  recognize  the  Fa- 
ther also  as  "  their  Father"  and  "  their  God,"  and,  therefore,  have  full 
confidence  that  He  would  come  to  them  with  the  Father. 

Two  disciples|  (not  of  the  number  of  the  Apostles§)  were  going  in 
the  afternoon  to,  the  village  of  Emmaus,  about  a  mile  from  Jerusalem. 
They  had  heard  that  the  body  was  not  found  in  the  grave,  and  of  what 
the  women  had  seen  before  Christ  appeared  to  them  ;  but  had  not  yet 
learned  that  he  had  risen  and  appeared.  As  they  walked  they  con- 
versed, in  sorrow,  of  what  had  occurred;  of  the  expectations  they  had 
cherished  that  Jesus  should  be  the  Messiah  to  redeem  the  people 
of  God ;  of  the  failure  of  their  hopes,  and  their  uncertainty  as  to  the 
future.  Absorbed  in  this  conversation,  they  were  joined  by  Jesus.  He 
took  part  in  their  conversation,  expounded  the  Scriptures  relating  to 
himself,  and  pointed  out  the  errors  into  which  they  had  fallen.  Under 
the  power  of  his  words  their  hearts  burned  within  them,  and  new  an- 
ticipations dawned  upon  their  souls.  But  still  they  did  not  recognize 
the  speaker,  either  because  the  thoughts  he  uttered  withdrew  their  at- 
tention from  his  person ;  or  because  they  could  not  suppose  that  He 
should  fi,rst  appear  to  ilicm  ;  or,  finally,  because  of  a  change  in  his  per- 
son. Not  until,  as  they  sat  at  meat,  he  pronounced  the  blessing,  broke 
the  bread,  and  gave  it  to  them,  did  they  discern  Him  who  had  sat  so 
often  with  them  at  table.  Although  the  lateness  of  their  recognition 
may  appear  strange,  the  time  of  it — just  at  the  repetition  of  an  accus- 
tomed habit — is  entirely  natural.  There  is  not  even  a  mystical  feature 
about  it,  in  itself  considered  ;  although  we  may  perhaps  trace,  in  the 
way  in  which  lie  made  himself  known,  an  allusion  to  the  promise  given 

*  If  the  passage  only  meant,  "Delay  not  hei'e  with  nie,  hut  go,"  we  might  expect  w^w 
yap  ava^aivia  instead  of  ovt,us  yup  aviiScSriKa. 

t  It  is  dear  that  the  i>as.sage  contains  no  proof  that  Christ  ascended  to  heaven  immedi- 
ately after  his  conversation  with  Mary.  Even  with  this  view  (since  it  cannot  be  supposed 
that  he  would  have  bnmglit  from  heaven  a  body  that  could  be  physically  touched)  the 
iiTTiaOai,  after  his  reappearance  fi-om  heaven,  would  have  to  be  taken  in  a  higher  sense. 

t  Luke,  xxiv.,  13.  $  And,  therefore,  Paul  does  not  mention  the  occurrence. 


APPEARANCES  OF  CHRIST.  431 

at  the  Last  Supper,  that  he  would  always  be  as  truly  with  them  in  their 
common  meals  as  he  was  on  that  occasion. 

§  301.  Christ  appears  to  Peter ;  and  to  the  rest  of  the  Apostles,  except 
Thomas. —  The  "  Breathing'''  upon  the  Apostles. 
The  two  disciples,  on  returning  to  the  city,  found  that  Christ  had 
appeai'ed  in  the  mean  time  to  the  Apostle  Peter.*  In  the  evening  of 
the  same  day,  the  Apostles,  Thomas  excepted,  were  assembled  with 
closed  doorSjt  when  Christ  suddenly  appeared  in  their  midst,  with  the 
usual  salutation,  "  Peace  be  unto  you''' — a  salutation  which,  from  Jiis 
lips,  had  a  peculiar  significance.!  To  prove  that  he  was  present  in 
body,  he  showed  them  the  wounds  in  his  hands,  feet,§  and  side.  In 
taking  leave  of  them,  he  said,  "  Peace  be  tmto  you.  As  my  Father 
hath  sent  me,  even  so  send  I  you."  Thus,  while  announcing  to  them 
the  peace  of  fellowship  with  him,  he  consecrated  them  as  messengers 
of  peace  to  all  mankind. 

He  then  "  breathed"  upon  them — a  symbol  of  the  inspiration  they 
were  to  receive  from  heaven,  to  fit  them  to  preach  his  Gospel  and  pro- 
claim foi'giveness  of  sins  in  his  name.||  Here,  again,  he  obviously  in- 
tended to  impress  vividly  upon  their  minds  the  promises  given  in  his 
last  discourses. 

Christ,  having  thus  given  a  sign  of  the  bestowing  of  the  Divine 
"  breath" — the  Divine  life  proceeding  from  him — added,  in  explana- 
tion, "  Receive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost''  The  hearts  of  the  disciples  w^ere 
prepared  for  this  by  the  reappearance  of  Christ  and  his  words  to  them  ; 
and  the  symbolical  act,  recalling  the  predictions  of  his  last  discoiu'ses 
in  regard  to  the  imparting  of  the  Spirit,  must  have  impressed  them 
profoundly.  The  higher  life  received  from  Christ  had  before  been 
covered  and  dormant ;  now,  perhaps,  a  new  consciousness  of  it  arose 
within  them.     Still  the  full  sense  of  the  sign  and  of  the  words  was  far 

*  Lnke,  xxiv.,  33,  34  ;  1  Cor.,  xv.,  5. 

t  Luke,  xxiv.,  36;  1  Cor.,  xv.,  5.  Paul  says  he  "  was  seen  of  the  twelve ;  but  this  term 
might  be  used  even  though  one  of  the  number  were  wanting ;  the  point  was,  Christ's  ap- 
pearance to  the  Apostles  as  a  body.  The  word  "  twelve"  was  the  common  designation  of 
the  Apostles  ;  the  number  was  a  subordinate  point.  Perhaps  even  Paul  did  not  recur  at 
the  time  to  the  absence  of  one  of  the  number.  %  John,  xiv.,  27.     Cf.  p.  398. 

§  It  may  be  the  case  that,  in  Luke's  account,  this  scene  is  intermingled  with  that  which 
took  place  eight  days  later  in  presence  of  Thomas.  He  relates  the  proof  of  corporeitj'  given 
by  Christ  in  tasting  food  with  the  disciples,  which  John,  who  does  not  appear  to  give  fall 
details,  may  have  omitted,  or,  perhaps,  mentioned  in  another  connexion,  John,  xxi.,  13. 
Hut  these  are  unimportant  points. 

II  In  Luke,  xxiv.,  47,  48,  we  find  a  fuller  developement — John  gives  it  more  in  a  sj'mbol- 
ical  form.  "  The  promise  of  my  Father"  (Luke,  xxiv.,  49)  seems  to  allude  to  Joel,  iii.,  1 ; 
but  a  comparison  with  Acts,  i.,  4,  leads  us  to  refer  it  to  a  promise  given  by  Christ  in  the 
Father's  name ;  hence  to  the  last  discourses  recorded  by  John.  VA.  Luke,  xii.,  IS  ;  and 
p.  395. 


432  THE  RESURRECTION. 

from  being  realized.  Not  as  yet  were  they  the  mighty  organs  of  that 
Spirit  for  the  diffusion  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  The  act,  therefore, 
was  in  ipart  prophetical. 

But  it  was  something  more  than  a  sign  or  symbol ;  a  Divine  opera- 
tion accompanied  it.  It  formed  a  link  of  connexion  between  the  prom- 
ise of  the  Spirit  and  its  fulfilment ;  between  the  impressions  which 
Christ's  personal  intercourse  had  made  upon  the  Apostles,  and  the 
great  fact  which  we  designate  as  "  the  outpouring  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 
The  operation  of  the  promised  Spirit  on  the  disciples  must  be  consid- 
ered, it  is  true,  as  a  progressive,  gradually  increasing  influence — a  new 
inspiring-  principle  of  their  whole  nature,  in  all  its  powers  and  tenden- 
cies. But  we  must  believe,  according  to  the  analogy  of  all  religious 
historical  developement,  that  thei'e  was  a  moment,  forming  an  epoch,  in 
which  the  consciousness  of  the  common  higher  life,  and  of  the  new 
creation  of  which  Christ  was  the  origin,  broke  forth  with  peculiar 
power  in  a  oreneral  inspiration  of  the  first  Christian  congiegations. 
All  great  religious  movements  set  out  from  such  actual  epoch-making 
moments ;  although,  indeed,  gradual  preparatory  stages  must  always 
oe  presupposed. 

§  302.   Christ  appears  to  Jive  hundred  Believers  ;  to  his  Brother  James  ; 

to  the  Apostles,  Thomas  included. — His  Conversation  with  Thomas. 

Christ  next  appeared  to  more  than  five  hundred  disciples,  assembled 
m  one  place  ;  and  then  to  his  brother  James.*  And  on  Sunday,  eight 
days  after  his  first  appearance  among  the  living,  he  again  showed  him- 
self to  the  j^postles  unawares,  while  they  Avere  assembled  with  closed 
doors.  Thomas  was  now  among  them;  the  same  Thomas  who  on  a 
former  occasion  had  displayed  his  peculiar  character  in  an  expression 

*  1  Cor.,  XV.,  7.  No  specific  description  of  '•  James"  being  triven  by  Paul  in  this  pas- 
sage, it  was,  in  all  probability,  James  the  Jast.  as  he  was  called,  tbe  brother  of  our  Lord. 
This  appearance  of  Christ  is  mentioned  in  the  Evang.  ad  Hebrce/js  (translated  by  Jerome) : 
bat  apparently  as  his  first  appearance ;  for  it  goes  on,  "  After  Jesus  had  eiven  the  shrond 
to  tbe  servant  of  the  high-priest  he  went  to  James."  Perhaps  this  arose  partly  from  the 
high  rank  assigned  to  James  by  the  sect  among  whom  this  Gospel  arose,  and  partJy  from 
the  fabnlons  circumstances  that  are  given  in  the  account,  of  the  following  sort :  "  James 
had  made  a  vow,  after  partaking  of  the  bread  given  by  Christ  at  the  Last  Supper,  that  he 
would  eat  no  more  tmtil  he  had  seen  Jesus  risen  from  the  dead.  Jesus,  coming  to  him. 
had  a  taVile  with  bread  brought  out.  blessed  the  bread,  and  gave  it  to  James,  with  the 
vrords,  '  Eat  thy  bread  now,  my  brother,  since  the  Son  of  Man  has  risen  from  the  dead'  " 
(Hieron.  de  Viris  Illast..  c.  ii.).  Mark  the  contrast  between  the  objective  tone  of  the  tradi- 
tions that  form  the  base  of  the  synoptical  Gospels,  and  this  tradition  of  a  part}-  that  owed 
its  origin  to  an  alloying  doctrinal  element,  remodelling  the  facts  to  serve  a  subjective 
purpose.  Another  and  striking  contrast  is,  that  our  Gospels  (and  Paul  following  themi 
make  Christ  appear  only  to  believers,  for  reasons  explained  in  our  text.  Had  they  aimed 
to  make  the  testimony  as  strong  as  possible,  without  regard  to  truth,  they  would  have 
represented  him  as  appearing  also  to  bis  opponents.  The  statement  above  cited  from 
Evans-  ad  Hebr.,  of  his  appearing  to  a  ser\-ant  of  the  high-priest,  conflicts  with  the  whole 
import  and  object  of  his  resurrection. 


APPEARANCES  OF  CHRIST.  433 

of  doubt.  Christ's  appearance,  and  the  way  in  which  he  reproached 
the  doubting  Thomas,  impressed  the  latter  with  so  powerful  and  over- 
whelming a  sense  of  the  Divinity  that  beamed  forth  in  the  manifesta- 
tion of  the  risen  Saviour,  that  he  addressed  him  by  a  title  which  had 
been  ascribed  to  him,  so  far  as  we  know,  by  none  of  the  disciples  : 
"  My  Lord  and  my  God^  We  are  not  justified  in  ascribing  to  Thomas, 
whose  immediate  impressions  impelled  him  to  this  exclamation,  a  fully- 
formed  theory  of  doctrine ;  yet  how  mighty  a  cause  must  have  been  at 
work  to  induce  a  man  trained  in  the  common  opinions  of  the  Jews  to 
use  such  a  title  !* 

Christ  then  said  to  Thomas,  "  'Because  thou  hast  seen  me,  thou  hast 
believed;  Messed  are  they  who  have  not  seen,  and  yet  have  believed." 
We  must  endeavour  to  unfold  the  rich  import  of  these  words.  Christ' 
does  not  refuse  the  title  given  to  him  by  Thomas.  He  acknowledges  his 
exclamation  as  an  expression  of  the  true  faith.  The  words  "  believed" 
and  "  believe"  cannot  be  confined  solely  to  Christ's  resurrection  ;  they 
refer  to  his  person  and  work  in  general,  and  to  the  resurrection  only 
as  one  necessary  element  thereof.  But  the  words  of  Christ  also  re- 
proved Thomas  for  needing  a  visible  sign  in  order  to  believe.  It  was 
implied  in  them  that  the  long  personal  intercourse  of  Thomas  with 
Christ,  and  his  faith  in  Jesus  as  the  Son  of  God  and  as  superior  to  death, 
should  have  been  enough  to  overcome  his  doubts — and,  on  this  foun- 
dation, he  should  have  found  the  statements  of  Christ's  reappearance, 
given  him  by  the  others,  any  thing  but  incredible.t  His  faith  should 
have  arisen  from  within,  not  waited  for  a  summons  from  without. 
And,  on  the  other  hand,  Christ  assigns  a  higher  place  to  those  who  arc 
led  to  faith,  without  such  visible  proofs,  by  his  spiritual  self-manifesta- 
tion in  the  preacl^ng  of  the  Gospel — a  faith  arising  inwardly  from  im- 
pressions made  upon  a  wiUing  mind.|  His  words  implied  that,  in  all 
after  time,  faith  would  be  impossible,  if  there  were  no  other  way  of 
passing  from  unbelief  to  belief  except  by  sensible  signs  of  assurance. 
The  passage  is  strikingly  illustrative  of  the  process  by  which  faith  is 
developed.  It  contains  the  ground  and  reason  why  the  Gospel  history 
had  to  be  handed  d,oion  precisely  in  a  form  which  could  not  but  give  oc- 
casion for  man  fold  doubts  to  the  human  understanding,  when  it  conducts 
its  inqtiiries  apart  from  the  religious  consciousness  and  religious  wants. 

*  Or,  are  we  to  suppose  that  John  involuntarily  remodelled  the  words  of  Thomas,  in  ac- 
cordance with  his  own  views  ?  Certainly  not.  Nowhere,  in  John's  accounts,  do  the  dis- 
ciples speak  out  of  character.  Least  of  all  could  he  have  attributed  to  one  like  Thomas 
more  than  he  uttered.  On  the  contrarj',  such  an  expression,  coming  from  a  Thomas,  would, 
for  that  veiy  reason,  impress  itself  more  strikingly  upon  the  minds  of  the  disciples.  It  is 
not  difficult,  therefore,  to  account  for  the  precision  with  which  John  records  the  expression. 

t  Christ's  reproof;  perhaps,  referred  also  to  the  intimations  he  had  given  of  his  approach- 
ing resurrectioii.  {  Cf.  p.  138,  139. 

Ee 


434  THE  RESURRECTION. 

§  303.   ClirisVs  Appearances  in  Galilee  ;  to  the  Seven  on  the  Sea  of  Ge- 
nesareth. —  The  Draught  of  Fishes. —  The  Conversation  with  Peter. 
We  must  now  briefly  compare  the  narrative  of  Matthew,  which  re- 
ports Christ's  appearances  to  the  disciples  in  Galilee  alone,  with  that 
of  the  other  Gospels* 

As  Matthew's  Gospel  records  particularly  the  events  of  Christ's 
ministry,  of  which  Galilee  was  the  theatre,  it  might  be  imagined  that, 
for  that  reason,  the  theatre  of  his  appearances  after  the  resurrection 
was  also,  in  that  Gospel,  unintentionally  transferred  to  Galilee  ;  this 
view  would  ascribe  to  the  tradition  inaccuracy  as  to  localities,  but  not 
as  to  the  facts  themselves.  But  Matthew  coincides  most  accurately,  in 
this  particular,  with  the  account  appended  to  John's  Gospel  (ch.  xxi.) ; 
in  which  it  is  stated  that  the  disciples  soon  retired  to  Galilee,  where 
Christ  reappeared  to  them.  As  for  internal  probability,  it  is  not 
likely  that  they  remained  in  the  city,  in  the  midst  of  Christ's  ene- 
mies, but  rather  that  they  returned  to  their  own  land,  where  dwelt 
most  of  Christ's  followers  and  friends.  Nor  is  there  any  thing  impossi- 
ble in  Matthew's  statement  that  Christ  bade  them  return  for  a  season 
to  Galilee,  where  he  could  have  quiet  and  undisturbed  intercourse 
with  them.  Their  return  thither  being  once  admitted  as  natural  in  it- 
self, it  would  naturally  follow  that  Christ  should  appear  often  in  order 
to  prevent  them  from  forgetting  their  high  calling  amid  the  cares  of 
life ;  and,  what  was  most  important,  to  repeat  to  them  the  promise 
(before  given  at  Jerusalem)  of  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  to  fit  them 
for  the  duties  of  that  calling. 

Seven  of  the  disciplest  were  fishing  in  the  Sqa  of  Genesareth. 
During  the  whole  night  they  caught  nothing.  Early  in  the  morning 
Jesus  appeared  and  asked  them,  kindly,  as  was  his  wont,  "  Children, 
have  ye  any  meat  V  When  they  replied  in  the  negative,  he  bade  them 
cast  the  net  anew  on  the  right  side  of  the  vessel.  John  was  the  first  to 
recognize  the  voice  of  Jesus.  The  hasty  Peter  could  not  wnit  until 
the  vessel  reached  the  shore,  but  swam  over. 

After  the  repast,  Christ  gently  reminded  Peter  of  his  promise,  p,o 
precipitately  made,  and  so  soon  broken  :  "  Lovest  thou  me  more  than 
these  ?"     Peter  replied,  "  Yea,  Lord,  thou  hnowest  that  I  love  thee.'"' 

*  With  regard  to  Paul's  statements  (1  Cor.,  xv.),  it  is  probable  that  be  mentioned  flie 
appearances  of  Christ  to  the  Apostles  (as  more  extensively  known)  np  to  a  certain  period, 
especially  his  first  appearances  at  Jerasalcm,  and  stopped  short;  it  being  unimportant  for 
bis  purpose  to  give  a  complete  enumeration,  adding  only  the  manifestation  'which  he  him- 
self received.    Another  explanation,  however,  might  be  given. 

t  John,  xxi.  The  account  in  this  chapter  was,  in  all  probability,  received  from  John's 
own  lips,  and  written  down,  after  his  death,  by  one  of  his  disciples.  There  is  no  ground 
to  question  its  credibility  as  a  whole. 


CHRIST'S  LAST  APPEARANCE.  435 

Then  said  Christ,  '■^  Feed  my  lambs*  (prove  your  love  by  acts)."  On 
Christ's  third  repetition  of  the  question,  Peter  felt  its  force,  and  ex- 
claimed, in  grief,  "Lord,  thou  Jcnov;est  all  things;  thou  knowest  that  I 
love  thee.^'  The  Saviour  again  repeated  the  injunction,  "  Feed  my 
lambs ;''  and  added,  as  a  proof  of  confidence  in  Peter's  fidelity,  that 
at  some  future  time  he  would  have  to  sacrifice  his  life  in  the  faithful 
discharge  of  his  calling. 

§  304.    Christ  ajypears  in  Galilee  for  the  last  Time.  —  The  Commission 

of  the  Apostles. 
In  his  final  appearance  among  the  disciples  in  Galilee  (Matt,,  xxviii., 
18),  Christ  reminded  them  anew  of  their  calling,  viz.,  to  preach  the 
Gospel  to  all  nations ;  and  to  admit  the  men  of  all  nations,  by  baptism, 
into  his  communion  and  discipleship.  And  he  assured  them  that  all 
power  was  given  to  him,  in  heaven  and  in  earth,  to  establish  the  king- 
dom of  God  victoriously ;  and  that  he  would  be  with  his  own,  even 
until  the  consummation  of  that  kingdom.! 

§  305.   Christ  ajjpears  for  the  last  Time  near  Je/usaleyn,  on  the  Mount 

of  Olives. 
The  minds  of  the  disciples  were  eagerly  directed  to  the  feast  in  com- 
memoration of  the  giving  of  the  Law  of  the  Old  Covenant  (Pentecost); 
the  new  relation  established  between  God  and  man  naturally  connected 
itself  with  the  idea  of  the  old.  It  was  a  reasonable  expectation  that  at 
this  feast  the  promise  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  by  which  they  were  to  be 

*  Refen-inj  cither  to  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  in  treneral,  or  in  particular  to  the 
supervision   of  the  first  congregations,  inasmuch   as  Peter,  especially,  had  the   %api(T//a 

t  The  subsequent  scruples  of  the  disciples  to  go  among  the  heathen  do  not  prove  that 
they  had  not  received  this  commission.  These  scruples  turned  upon  the  single  point  of 
admitting  the  heathen  without  a  previous  conversion  to  Judaism.  Some  suppose  that  the 
naming  of  "  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost"  in  connexion  with  baptism  (v.  19)  is  foreign  to 
the  passage,  and  was  derived  from  later  ecclesiastical  language.  But  that  expression, 
coming  from  the  lips  of  Christ,  was  precisely  fitted  to  betoken  the  peculiar  nature  of  the 
new  communion  and  worship,  with  reference  to  his  earlier  teaching,  and  especially  to  his 
last  discourses  preserved  by  John ;  for  every  thing  there  refers  to  the  Father,  as  revealed 
by  the  Son;  to  the  Spirit,  proceeding  from  the  Father  and  imparted  by  the  Son;  to  com- 
munion with  the  Father,  through  the  Son,  in  the  Spirit  of  Divine  life  imparted  by  him.  It 
is  possible  that  these  words  were  not  at  first  considered  as  a  formula  to  be  adhered  to 
rigidly  in  baptism,  and  that  the  rite  was  performed  (the  essential  being  made  prominent) 
with  reference  to  Christ's  name  alone;  and  that  only  at  a  later  period  it  was  thought  that 
the  weirds  constituted  a  literal  and  necessary  fonn.  It  is  undeniable  that  this  account  does 
not  bear  so  distinct  a  historical  stamp  as  other  nan-atives  of  Christ's  reappearance ;  it  is 
possible  that  several  occurrences,  on  separate  occasions,  were  taken  together  and  trans- 
ferred to  Galilee.  The  fact  that  Matthew  represents  Christ  as  reappearing  to  his  disciples 
only  in  Galilee,  while  Luke  and  Paul  testify  to  the  contrary,  may  help  us  to  decide  upon 
the  synoptical  accounts  of  Christ's  ministry  up  to  the  time  of  his  last  journey  to  Jerusalem, 
the  theatre  of  which,  also,  they  place  in  Galilee.  This  is  another  testimony  in  favour  of 
John's  account. 


436  THE  ASCENSION. 

made  powerful  organs  of  their  Divine  Master,  would  be  fulfilled.  They 
went  to  Jerusalem  a  week  before  the  time  of  the  feast.  As  they  were 
walking  to  the  Mount  of  Olives,  just  forty  days  after  Christ's  first  ap- 
pearance, they  were  joined  by  Christ,  and  he  repeated  the  promise  for 
the  last  time. 

Still  cleaving  to  their  worldly  Messianic  hopes,  they  asked  the 
Saviour  whether  he  intended  then  to  found  his  kingdom  in  its  glory 
(Acts,  i.,  6).  In  reply,  he  declared,  as  he  had  always  done  during  his 
life  on  earth,  *'  It  is  not  for  you  to  Icnow  the  times  or  the  seasons,  which 
the  Father  hath  put  in  his  own  poiccr.'"  It  was  enough  (he  told  them) 
for  them  to  know  their  own  calling  in  reference  to  the  kingdom  of 
God,  and  how  they  were  to  obtain  power  to  fulfil  it,  viz.,  by  receiving 
the  Holy  Ghost.  With  this  last  reply,  and  this  last  promise,  he  was 
removed  from  their  eyes. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

THE    ASCENSION. 
§  306.   Connexion  of  the  Ascension  toith  the  Resurrection. 

WE  come  now  to  treat  of  the  Ascension  of  Christ — a  close  of 
Christ's  ministry  on  earth  corresponding  to  its  beginning. 

It  must  not  be  thought  that  the  essential  feature  of  the  ascension  is 
vouched  for  only  by  Luke.  It  would  rest  on  firm  grounds,  even  apart 
from  the  particular  form  in  which  it  is  represented  in  Luke  ;  nay,  even 
if  there  were  not  a  word  about  it  either  in  his  Gospel  or  in  the  Acts. 
That  essential  feature  is,  that  Christ  did  not  f  ass  from  his  earthly  exist- 
ence to  a  higher  through  natural  death,  hut  in  a  svpernatiiral  way  ;  i.  e., 
that  he  was  removed  from  this  globe,  and  from  the  conditions  of  earthly 
life,  to  a  higher  region  of  existence  in  a  way  not  conformed  to  the  or- 
dinaiy  laws  of  corporeal  existence  or  to  be  explained  by  them.  This 
fact  is  as  certain  as  his  resurrection ;  both  must  stand  or  fall  together. 
Either  the  resurrection  itself  must  be  denied  ;  or  it  must  be  considered 
as  a  mere  natural  recovery  from  a  transitory  suspension  of  the  powers 
of  life  (both  which  hypotheses  we  have  shown  to  be  untenable) ;  or 
such  a  termination  of  his  life  on  earth  as  we  have  just  defined,  must  be 
inevitably  admitted. 

Although  obscurity  rests,*  to  a  great  extent,  upon  the  nature  of  the 

*  We  deem  it  better  to  acknowledge  a  problem  unsolved  than  to  give  attempts  at  so- 
lution, on  the  one  side  or  the  other,  which  will  not  satisfy  a  clear  thinker.  Certainly  we 
over-estimate  our  knowledi^e  of  the  laws  of  the  creation  not  a  little,  when  we  deem  onr- 
selves  authorized  to  deny  the  reality  of  a  phenomenon,  simply  because  we  cannot  explain 
it  satisfactorily.  Tliere  are  more  things  between,  heaven  and  earth  than  our  philosophic 
may  dream  of. 


THE  ASCENSION.  437 

existence  ofClirist  on  eaitli  after  his  resurrection,  and  upon  the  nature 
of  die  corporeal  organism  with  which  he  rose  from  the  dead ;  still,  this 
much  is  certain,  that  the  fundamental  conception,  on  which  all  the  rep- 
resentations of  the  New  Testament  are  founded,  exhibits  the  resurrec- 
tion only  as  the  means  of  transition  from  the  form  of  his  earthly  being, 
whose  close  was  his  death,  to  a  higher  form  of  personal  existence  su- 
perior to  death;  as  the  beginning  of  a  new  life  which  was  not  to  be, 
as  the  former,  subject  to  the  laws  of  a  corporeal,  earthly  organism,  but 
was  destined  for  an  imperishable  developement.  When  Paul  declared 
(Rom.,  vi.,  9,  10)  that  Clu'ist,  risen  from  the  dead,  should  die  no  more, 
because  death  had  no  dominion  over  him ;  when  he  opposed  this  res- 
urrection (2  Cor.,  xiii.,  4)  as  the  commencement  of  a  life  in  Divine 
power^  to  his  earlier  life  in  human  weakness  through  which  he  v>'as 
made  subject  to  death,  he  only  gave  utterance  to  a  conviction  that  was 
common  to  all  the  eye-witnesses  of  the  resurrection.  The  mode  of 
Christ's  reappearance  had  made  the  same  impression  upon  them  all. 
And  the  resurrection  had  necessarily  to  be  considered  as  the  I'estora- 
tion  from  death,  in  a  higher  form,  of  his  personal  existence  (consisting 
of  the  union  of  body  and  soul,  not  subject  thereafter  to  death,  but  des- 
tined for  an  unbroken  eternity  of  life),  in  order  to  become  the  founda- 
tion of  belief  in  an  eternal  life  of  the  glorified  human  personality,  to 
spring  out  of  death  ;  in  order  to  be  \\\ei  fact  on  which  this  faith  (as  a 
historically-grounded  belief)  could  be  established.  The  restoration  of 
an  earthly  life  from  death,  afterward  to  be  developed  according  to  ordi- 
nary laws,  and  to  terminate  in  death,  would,  in  this  respect,  have  been 
of  no  value. 

§  307.    The  Ascension  necessary  for  the  Conviction  of  the  Apostles. 

Moreover,  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  considered  as  a  histoncal  link 
in  the  psychological  developement  of  the  Apostles  (which  cannot  be 
explained,  as  we  have  shown,  unless  the  resurrection  is  taken  foi^  grant- 
ed), loses  its  true  significance  in  this  regard,  if  Chi'ist  were  removed 
from  the  earth  in  any  other  than  a  supernatural  way.  How  could  his 
resurrection  have  formed,  for  the  disciples,  the  basis  for  belief  in  an 
eternal  life,  if  it  had  been  subsequently  followed  by  death?  Their 
faith,  raised  by  his  reappearance,  would  have  sunk  with  his  dissolution. 
Their  belief  in  his  Messiahship  would  have  been  rudely  shocked ;  he 
would  have  been  to  them  again  an  ordinary  man.  And  how  could  the 
conviction  of  his  exaltation,  which  we  find  every  where  outspoken  in 
their  writings  with  such  strength  and  confidence,  ever  have  arisen? 
Although,  therefore,  the  visible  fact  of  the  ascension  is  only  expressly 
mentioned  by  Luke,  yet  all  that  John  says  of  his  going  up  to  his  heav- 
enly Father,  and  all  that  the  Apostles  preached  of  his  elevation  to  God, 
presupposed  their  conviction  that  he  had  been  supernaturally  removed 


438  THE  ASCENSION. 

from  the  earth,  to  the  utter  exclusion  of  the  idea  that  he  had  departed 
in  the  ordinary  way  of  death.  It  was  not  necessary  to  make  express 
mention  of  the  outward  and  visible  fact,  as  they  never  entertained  the 
thought  that  Christ,  in  the  form  in  which  he  appeared  to  them  after 
his  resurrection,  could  be  touched  again  by  death.  When  he  took 
leave  of  them,  and  they  saw  him  no  more,  they  never  thought  of  any 
thing  else  but  that  he  had  been  supernaturally  removed  from  human 
view  to  a  higher  region  of  existence. 

If  it  be  said  now  that  "  it  does  not  follow,  because  the  Apostles  con- 
ceived the  matter  so,  that  it  really  was  so ;  and  that  we  must  distin- 
guish the  fundamental yac<  front  their  subjective  conceptions,"  we  have 
the  reply  ready.  Their  subjective  conception  was  founded  in  a  fact 
which  it  presupposed,  viz.,  the  way  in  which  Christ  showed  himself  to 
them  after  his  resurrection;  in  the  impression  which  he  made  upon 
them  by  his  higher  and  celestial  appearance.  And  further,  apart  from 
this  necessary  presupposition,  if  Christ  led  the  Apostles  to  form  such 
a  subjective  conception  merely  by  mysteriously  appearing  and  vanish- 
ing, by  keeping  silence  as  to  his  abode  and  as  to  the  end  towards  which 
he  advanced,  he  must  have  planned  a  fraud,  to  form  the  basis  of  their 
religious  conviction  from  that  time  on.  As  surely  as  we  cannot  attrib- 
ute such  a  fraud  to  the  Holy  One,  who  called  himself  the  "  Truth," 
so  certainly  must  we  take  for  granted  an  objective  Jact  as  the  source  of 
the  faith  of  the  Apostles. 

§  308.  Co/ifiexion  of  all  the  Supernatural  Facts  in  Christ's  Manifestation. 
We  make  the  same  remark  upon  the  Ascension  of  Christ  as  was  be- 
fore made  upon  his  miraculous  Conception.*  In  regard  to  neither  is 
prominence  given  to  the  special  and  actual y^/c<  in  the  Apostolic  wri- 
tings ;  in  regard  to  both  such  a  fact  is  presupposed  in  the  general  con- 
viction of  the  Apostles,  and  in  the  connexion  of  Christian  conscious- 
ness. Thus  the  end  of  Christ's  appearance  on  earth  corresponds  to  its 
beginning.  No  link  in  its  chain  of  supernatural  facts  can  be  lost  with- 
out taking  away  its  significance  as  a  whole.  Christianity  rests  upon 
these  facts ;  stands  or  falls  with  them.  By  faith  in  them  has  the  Di- 
vine life  been  generated  from  the  beginning ;  by  faith  in  them  has  that 
life  in  all  ages  regenerated  mankind,  raised  them  above  the  limits  of 
earthly  life,  changed  them  from  glehce  adscriptis  to  citizens  of  heaven, 
and  formed  the  stage  of  transition  from  an  existence  chained  to  nature, 
to  a  free,  celestial  life,  far  raised  above  it.  Were  this  faith  gone,  there 
niight,  indeed,  remain  many  of  the  effects  of  what  Christianity  had 
been  ;  but  as  for  Christianity  in  the  true  sense,  as  for  a  Christian  Church, 
there  could  be  none. 

•  Cf.  p.  16. 


INDEX. 


Accommodation,  Christ's  use  of,  page  113, 
114,  149. 

Adulteress,  decision  in  case  of,  313. 

Adultei-y,  Christian  law  of,  233. 

Advent,  second,  of  Christ,  317,  367. 

Aenon,  177. 

Agony  in  the  garden,  407. 

Alexandrian  theology,  had  no  influence,  ifcc, 
39,  95,  167,  169,  180. 

Ambition  of  the  disciples  rebuked,  286,  347. 

Annas,  410. 

Apostles,  subordinate  teachers,  100,  116;  un- 
educated men,  119  ;  training  of,  121 ;  trial 

'  mission  of,  257 ;  commission  of,  after  the  res- 
uiTection,  431-5. 

Ascension  of  Christ,  436. 

B. 

Baptism,  as  used  by  John,  50 ;  by  water  and 
fire,  53  ;  of  Christ  by  John,  57,  61 ;  instituted 
by  Clirist,  126;  of  suflPering,  316. 

Bartimeus,  346. 

Bath  Col,  133,  377. 

Bethany,  Christ  at,  336. 

Bethesda,  miracle  at,  217. 

Bethsaida,  miracle  at,  270. 

Blasphemy  against  Holy  Ghost  and  Son  of 
Man,  243. 

Body  and  blood  of  Christ,  267. 

Bread  of  Life,  266. 

C. 

Caesar,  rights  of,  361. 

Caiaphas,  343,  411. 

Calvary,  417. 

Cana,  166,  18.5. 

Capernaum,  Christ  at,  162,  186,  238  (in  syna- 
gogue), 205,  303. 

Celibacy,  330. 

Census,  in  time  of  Augustus,  20. 

Centurion's  slave  healed,  238. 

Children  blessed,  331. 

Christ,  birth  of,  18 ;  descent  from  David,  19, 
364;  his  brothers  and  sisters,  29  ;  among  the 
doctors,  31 ;  education  of,  35;  trade  of?  40  ; 
plan  of,  79 ;  as  King,  87 ;  observed  Jewish 
law,  88 ;  as  Prophet,  99  ;  left  no  written 
document,  100  ;  person  of,  3,  68,  95, 161, 192 


341,  406  ;  mode  of  life  with  disciples,  203, 
214  ;  Light  of  the  Worid,  293,  299,  340 ;  his 
struggles  of  soul,  314,  376,  404  :  prayer  as 
High-priest,  402;  trial  of,  410;  crucifixion  of, 
418;  last  appearance  of,  435;  ascension  oj', 
436. 

Christian  consciousness  defined,  2. 

Christianity,  the  aim  of  human  progress,  122, 
not  peace,  but  a  sword,  316  ;  work  of,  329  ; 
relations  to  civil  society,  233,  313,  361 ;  rests 
upon  supernatural  facts,  438. 

Church,  founding  of  the,  122;  name  of,  123. 

Commandment,  first  and  great,  362  ;  the  Tiew, 
391. 

Crucifixion  of  Christ,  418. 

D. 

David,  Christ  son  of,  19,  364. 

Death  of  Christ,  intimated  by  himself,  323  ; 
necessity  for,  344,  376  ;  reality  of,  425. 

Demoniacal  possession,  145,  240, 192,  239,283. 

De  Wette,  204,  230,  248,  306,  332. 

Disciples,  sifting  of  269 ;  fail  to  heal  demoniac, 
283;  ambition  of  286, 347 ;  choice  of  seventy, 
304;  warnings  to,  393;  consolation  of,  394, 
400. 

Disciples  of  John,  jealous  of  Christ,  178. 

Discipleship,  test  of  237,  309. 

Diseases,  miraculous  healing  of,  141. 

Dives  and  Lazarus,  321. 

Divine  life,  its  communication  the  highest  mir- 
acle, 140;  its  supports,  399. 

Divine  nature  in  Christ,  3,  68,  95, 307,  327,  338, 
341,  369,  376,  406,  407,  422. 

Divorce,  233,  328. 

E. 

Ebionites,  62,  88,  92,  97.  144,  276. 

Ebionitish  Gospel,  15,  49,  65,  68,  313,  334,  422, 
432. 

Elias,  the  forerunner  of  Christ,  283. 

Emmaus,  conversation  on  the  way  to,  430. 

Ephraim,  Christ  at,  344. 

Essenism,  37. 

Eucharist,  institution  of,  388. 

Evangel,  ad  Hebraeos.  [See  Ebionitish  Gos- 
pel] 

Evil,  origin  of,  148.     [See  Sin.\ 

Exorcists,  133,  150,  241. 


440 


INDEX. 


F. 

Faith,  presupposes  the  "drawing  of  the  Fa- 
ther," 106,  266  ;  different  stages  of,  138, 165, 
174,  433  ;  the  nccessarj-  condition  of  aid  from 
Christ,  196,  266,  285;  the  centurion's,  239; 
power  of,  285,  358,  433 ;  faitli  and  forgive 
ness,  211,  279. 

Fasting,  203,  235. 

Father,  Christ's  oneness  with,  327,  396. 

Feet,  washing  of,  386. 

Fig-tree  cursed,  357. 

Fire  to  be  kindled,  315. 

Forgiveness  of  sins,  211. 

G. 

Gadarene  demoniac,  192. 

GalUee,  theatre  of  Christ's  labours,  155,  180, 

185  ;  second  ministry  in,  222  ;  appearances 

in  after  resurrection,  434. 
Gethsemane,  404. 
(jod,  as  spirit,  knowledge  of,  183,  362 ;    the 

only  Good,  332. 
Grace,  unmerited,  350,  374. 

H. 

Hades,  271. 

Heathen,  301,319,  375. 

Herod,  25;  Antipas,  179,  323,  415. 

Herodians,  360. 

History,  relation  to  miracles,  132  ;  as  com- 
mentary, 183,  229. 

Holy  Ghost,  at  Christ's  baptism,  67  ;  agent  of 
new  birth,  175;  blasphemy  against,  243; 
breathed  upon  Apostles,  431.     [See  Spirit.^ 

Huss,  John,  362. 

Hypocrisy  rebuked,  255.  [See  Sermon  on 
the  Mount.] 


Immortality,  362. 
Inspiration,  7,  47,  59,  172. 
Interpretation,  94,  100. 


Jairus's  daughter,  196. 

James,  the  brother  of  Christ,  29,  432. 

James  and  John,  sons  of  Zebedee,  164,  347. 

Jericho,  Christ  at,  345. 

Jerusalem,  Christ's  ministry  frequently  exer- 
cised there,  156;  his  first  labours  at,  168; 
second  journey  to,  217  ;  last,  345 ;  triumphal 
entry,  354  ;  weeps  over,  356  ;  judgments 
predicted  upon,  366. 

Jesus,  the  name,  17. 

Jewish  people,  their  relations  to  Christ,  202; 
his  ministry  confined  to  them,  why,  258, 
879. 


John  the  Baptist,  calling  of,  45;  accounts  o{, 
obscure,  46 ;  mode  of  life,  48  ;  relation  to 
Messiah,  53 ;  possible  wavering  in  his  con- 
victions, 58,  198 ;  his  message  from  prison, 
60, 198 ;  he  points  out  Christ,  160 ;  final  testi- 
mony, 178 ;  his  position  as  definedl)y  Christ, 
199. 

John  the  Evangelist,  joins  Christ,  162  ;  his  dis- 
position and  tendencies,  161,  176,  394. 

John's  Gospel,  its  credibility  and  genuineness, 
6,  167,  171,  179,  180,  291  ;  silent  as  to  mi- 
raculous conception,  16;  objects  of,  67,  96; 
compared  with  sj'uoptical,  110, 155,  343,  404 ; 
its  omissions,  299. 

Jonah  the  Prophet,  sign  of,  136,  245. 

Josephus,  as  authority  on  John  Baptist,  48. 

Judas  Iscariot,  117,  248,  269,  352,  379,  387,  408. 

Judgment,  intimated  by  Christ,  219,  317, 368  ; 
in  Matt.,  xxv.,  373. 

K. 

Keys,  power  of  the,  217. 

Kingdom  of  God,  longed  for  under  old  cove- 
nant, 308 ;  longed  for  in  Israel  at  Christ's 
time,  22;  also  by  the  heathen,  25  ;  the  ob- 
ject of  Christian  longing,  308;  way  prepared 
for  by  Baptist,  49,  seq. ;  its  two-fold  bearing, 
86 ;  relation  of  new  to  old  form,  88,  170  ;  re- 
alized by  Christ  not  as  a  worldly,  but  a  spir- 
itual kingdom,  72,  74,  81,  seq.,  208,  409,  412, 
413  ;  realized  by  him,  also,  for  the  heathen, 
255,  258,  302,  320,  370  ;  means  employed  by 
Christ  in  founding  it,  99  ;  based  on  his  self- 
manifestation  inu-ord,  99,  seq.,  415;  himir- 
acles,  127,  seq. ;  in  sujerings,  83,  84,  316, 
seq.,  407  ;  the  coming  of,  555  ;  its  law  of  de- 
velopement,  106,  241 ;  its  growth  and  prog- 
ress, 184,  190,  208,  314,  seq.  ;  the  Sei-mon  on 
the  Mount  its  Magna  Charta,  223 ;  its  tri- 
umiihs,  273,  307,  368  ;  its  nature  illustrated, 
331,  370,  371,  414. 

L. 

Last  Supper,  381. 

Law,  observed  by  Christ,  88,  229,  237,  290, 
325;  his  "destroying  and  fulfilling  of,"  PI, 
230  [see  Moral]  ;  law  and  gospel,  88,  seq., 
201,  seq.,  229,  seq. 

Lawyers,  247,  363. 

Lazarus,  family  of,  336  ;  death  of,  338  ;  resur- 
rection of,  342. 

Legalism,  Jewish,  contrasted  with  Christian 
liberty,  201,  333,  363. 

Leper  healed,  237;  ten  healed,  324. 

Light  of  the  World,  Christ  the,  293,  299,  340. 

Logos,  62,  96. 

Love,  the  quickening  principle  of  Divine  life, 
211 ;  Christian  law  of,  234,  391. 


INDEX. 


441 


M. 

Magians,  26. 

Mammon  of  unrighteousness,  276. 

Marriage,  379. 

Martha,  336. 

Mary  Magdalene,  211. 

Mary,  sister  of  Lazarus,  336,  351,  429. 

Mary,  mother  of  Jesus,  14,  16,  20,  23, 166. 

Mattliew,  usage  of,  in  quoting  from  Old  Testa- 
ment, 104  ;  his  calling,  213  ;  his  Gospel  ori- 
ginally in  Hebrew,  6  ;  principle  on  which  he 
an-anges  his  matter  (connexion  of  fact  and 
thought),  108,  202,  207,  224,  258,  310,  314. 

Meekness,  225. 

Merit,  no  place  in  kingdom  of  God,  350,  374. 

Messiah,  Old  Testament  idea  of,  64,  364,  seq. ; 
in  Israel,  21,  22;  Simeon's,  24;  heathen 
longing  for,  25 ;  whether  only  revived  by 
John  Baptist,  45,  54,  160,  198;  Nicodemus, 
173;  Christ  tlie  conscious  Messiah,  30,  41, 
81 ;  declares  himself  such  (from  beginning] 
181, 198,  219,  220,  264,  27] ,  290,  326,  355,  411 
carnal  conceptions  of  Jews  and  disciples  re- 
buked, 218,  seq.,  224,  265,  seq.,  272,  286,  295, 
326,  331,  347,  437 ;  designations  of,  94 ;  Christ 
recognized  as,  by  John,  55,  66,  160. 

Miracle  of  draught  of  fishes,  162  ;  water  chan 
ed  to  wine,  166 ;  storm  subdued,  191 ;  issue 
of  blood,  195  ;  Jairus's  daughter,  196 ;  wid- 
ow's son,  196  ;  lame  man,  218  ;  leper,  237  ; 
demoniac,  239,  283;  paralytic,  250,  252;  in- 
firai  woman,  253  ;  feeding  of  five  thousand, 
261  ;  walking  on  the  water,  264;  at  Beth 
saida,  270  ;  man  born  blind,  298  ;  ten  lepers, 
325;  raising  of  Lazarus,  342;  blind  Barti- 
meus,  346. 

Miracles,  connected  with  Christ's  teaching, 
127  ;  their  relation  to  the  course  of  nature, 
130;  to  Christ's  manifestation,  131;  to  his 
tory,  132;  object  of,  134,137,166,358;  wit 
nesses  to  Christ's  Messialiship,  132, 138  ;  in 
regard  to  supernatural  agency,  140 ;  wrought 
on  material  nature,  152. 

Moral  stand-pomt  distinguished  from  Zt'g-aZ,  231 
236,  328. 

Moses,  forerunner  of  Messiah,  222. 

Mount,  Sermon  on,  223. 

Miiller,  Daniel,  136. 

Murder,  Christian  law  of,  232. 

Mysteries  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  104. 

Mythical  theory  refuted,  13,  20,  23,  25,  29 
377. 

Mythology,  difference  from  Theism,  18. 

Mythus,  distinguished  from  parable,  107. 


N. 


Nain,  miracle  at,  196. 


Name  of  Christ,  acting  in  the,  288  ;  prayer  in 
the,  397,  401. 

Nathanael,  calling  of,  164. 

Nazareth,  return  to  from  Egypt,  28 ;  Christ's 
first  preaching  at,  40,  186. 

Neighbour,  love  of,  234. 

New  birth,  174. 

Nicodemus,  interview  with  Christ,  173 ;  in  San- 
hedrim, 298. 

O. 

Oaths,  38,  234. 

Old  and  New  Dispensations,  relations  of,  200. 

Old  Testament,  use  of  passages  from  by  Christ, 

115,  327,  ,329,  361,  364. 
Olshausen,  197. 


Parable,  idea  of,  107;  use  of  by  Christ,  102, 104. 

Parables,  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  85  ;  order  of 
in  New  Testament,  108;  not  wanting  in  John, 
111;  pai-able  of  sower,  188;  drag-net,  190; 
wheat  and  tares,  190  ;  new  wine  in  old  bot- 
tles, 205;  prodigal  son,  214;  Pharisee  and 
publican,  216  ;  great  Supper,  254  ;  unjust 
steward,  273  ;  good  Shepherd,  301 ;  tower, 
311;  salt,  311;  precious  pearl,  312;  mustard 
seed,  314  ;  Dives  and  Lazarus,  321 ;  pounds, 
348 ;  labourers  in  vineyard,  349  ;  fig-tree, 
357  ;  good  Samaritan,  363  ;  wedding-feast, 
369;  wicked  husbajidman,  371;  talents,  372  ; 
ten  virgins,  373. 

Paradise,  419. 

Passover,  but  one  in  synoptical  Gospels,  three 
in  John,  155;  fii-st,  168;  second,  217;  last, 
345. 

Paul,  used  written  memoirs  of  Christ's  life,  6 ; 
silence  as  to  miraculous  conception,  16;  as- 
sumes Christ's  descent  from  David,  19,  364 ; 
confinns  the  account  of  the  choice  of  the 
Apostles,  117  ;  a  witness  of  the  resurrection, 
425,  430  ;  indirectly  of  the  ascension,  437  ; 
reports  Christ's  words,  90,  388 ;  alludes  to 
them,  273  ;  his  position  among  the  Apostles, 
119;  "wise  as  serpent,"  &c.,  277;  his  doc- 
trine of  the  person  of  Christ,  97  ;  his  teach- 
ings presuppose  Christ's,  as  germs,  90,  92, 
104,  187,  202,  216,  28.5,  350,  372. 

Peace,  Christ's  salutation  of,  398. 

Peraea,  Christ  at,  328. 

Peter,  his  first  meeting  with  Christ,  162;  his 
call  and  character,  164,  257,  272,  290,  335, 
387,  392,  409,  434  ;  his  acknowledgments  of 
Christ,  139,  269,  270  ;  obtains  power  of  keys, 
217. 

Pharisees,  35,  157,  173,  180,  203,  212,  218,  222, 
240,  244,  246,  251,253;  293, 300,319,  seq.,  359. 


442 


INDEX. 


Phftrisaism,  93,  235,  363,  364. 

Philip  and  Thomas,  conversation  with  Christ, 

395. 
Pilate,  413,  seq. 

Plan  of  Christ,  79  ;  not  altered,  82. 
Prayer,  forms  of,  207;  Lord's  Prayer,  207;  not 

Pharisaical,  235  ;  in  name  of  Christ,  397 ;  of 

Christ  as  High-priest,  402 ;  for  his  enemies, 

419. 
Prophecy,  unconscious,  22. 
Providence,  2G0. 

Prudence,  in  ministry,  273,  277  ;  Christian,  373 
Publicans,  Christ  with,  213. 
Punitive  justice,  143. 

R. 
Rabbi,  title  of,  as  applied  to  Christ,  40. 
Raising  of  the  dead,  151. 
Reason,  pride  of,  281. 
Reign  with  Christ,  335. 
Relatives  of  Christ,  29,  244,  292. 
Resurrection,  intimated  by  Christ,  220,  340 

361 ;  of  Christ,  422. 
Revelation,  stages  of,  182 ;  Christ's  doctrine 

as,  292. 
Revenge,  234. 
Reward  in  heaven,  228,  235 ;    rewards,  pas 

sion  for  rebuked,  350. 
R,uler,  Christ's  conversation  with,  332. 


Sabbath,  218,  253,  seq. 

Sabbath-breaking,  Christ  accused  of,  218,  252 

Sacraments.     [See  Eucharist  and  Baptism.] 

Sacrifice  of  purification,  23. 

Sadducees,  35,  50,  361. 

Salome,  347. 

Samaritan,  good,  parable  of,  363. 

Samaritan  woman,  conversation  with,  90, 180, 

Samaritans,  185 ;  reasons  for  their  exclusion 
from  first  mission  of  Apostles,  258  ;  leper 
cured,  324. 

Sanhedrim,  movements  of  against  Christ,  297, 
.300,  343,  3.59,  378,  409,  412. 

Satan,  personality  of,  74,  148,  240,  seq. ;  king- 
dom of,  306. 

Schleiermacher,  2,  14,  22,  90,  95,  122, 148, 163, 
201,  250,  288,  313,  321,  325,  347. 

Self-denial,  310. 

Sermon  on  the  Mount,  110,  223. 

"  Servants"  distinguished  from  ''friends,"  120. 

Seventy  disciples  chosen,  304. 

Shepherds,  announcement  to,  21. 

Simeon,  prophecy  of,  24. 

Sin  and  physical  evil,  relations  of,  141, 143,  218, 
298,321. 

Slavery,  38.  Zaccheus,  346. 


Son  of  God,  title  of,  as  applied  to  Christ,  94, 

96. 
Son  of  Man,  95  ;  blasphemy  against,  243. 
Sower,  parable  of,  188. 
Spirit,  Holy,  promise  of,  397,  400.     [See  Holy 

Ghost.] 
Star  of  the  wise  men,  25. 
Sti-auss,  4,  14,  173,  185,  217,  231,  233,  242,  248, 

251,  288,  322,  336,  341,  352,355,  369,380,  417. 
SuEPerings  of  Chi-ist,  intimated  by  himself,  177, 

184,  376. 
Synoptical  Gospels,  their  origin,  6  ;  difference 

between  them  and  Jolm,  110, 155,  404. 
Syro-Phcenician  woman,  279. 


Tabernacles,  feast  of,  Christ  attends,  291. 

Talents,  parable  of,  372. 

Teaching,  Christ's  mode  of,  101 ;  presented 
seeds  of  thought,  102  ;  Christ's  not  confined 
to  parables,  109. 

Temple,  Christ's  manifestation  greater  than, 
89,255;  "  destroy  this,"  &c.,  137, 179;  purify- 
ing of  the,  168. 

Temptation,  209. 

Temptation  of  Christ,  70 ;  its  import  as  a  whole, 
73. 

Theocracy  of  Old  Testament,  connexion  of 
Christ's  plan  with  it,  81,  335,  365;  distin- 
guished from  Christ's  by  parables,  85 ;  de- 
velopement  in  New  Testament,  229,  290. 

Thomas,  his  doubts,  140;  Christ's  appearance 
to,  432. 

Transfiguration  of  Christ,  282. 

Transubstantiation,  267,  389. 

Tribute  to  Caesar,  Christ's  decision  on,  360. 

Triumphal  entry,  354. 

Truth,  182  ;  power  of,  248 ;  relation  to  free- 
dom, 296  ;  spirit  of,  397,  401. 

U.,  V. 
Unpardonable  sin,  243. 
Vanity,  warning  against,  307. 
Vine  and  branches,  similitude  of,  399. 

W. 

Water  and  the  Spirit,  birth  of,  175. 

Water  of  Life,  181,  294. 

Way,  Christ  the,  395. 

Wealth,  right  use  of,  273 ;  dangers  of,  334. 

Wcisse,  15,  19,  110,  378. 

Widow,  the  importunate,  318. 

Widow's  mite,  366. 

Worship  in  spirit  and  truth,  182. 


PASSAGES    OF    SCRIPTURE 

aUOTED    OR    ALLUDED    TO. 


OLD  TESTAMENT. 
Genesis. 

ii,  24 329 

iii.,  15 222 

Exodus. 

xiiL,  2,  12 23 

xsi.,  32 381 

Leviticus. 

xii.,  2 23 

XIV.,  1 237 

Numbers. 

iii.,  45 23 

iv.,  3 42,  297 

viii.,  25 297 

si.,  8 49 

xviii 23 

Deuteronomy. 

vi.,  16  71 

viit,  3 71 

xviii.,  15 222 

xviii.,  20,  22 411 

1  Samuel. 

xxi 255 

Nehemiah. 

iii.,  15 299 

Psalms. 

ii.,7 68 

viii.,  3 357 

xxii 420 

xxii..  17 418 

lxxxii.,6 327,  365 

xci.,  11,  12 71 

ex.,  1 364,365 

cxviii.,  25,  26 356 

Isaiah. 

vi.,  9 104 

vii.,  14    15 

xxxiii.,  16 21 

XXXV.,  5 198 

xxxviii.,  10 271 

jtl.,  3 30 

liii 25,  160 

M.,  7 169 

Ixi.,  1  198 

Jere-miah. 
vii.,  11  169 


Ezekiel. 

Page 
xxsvi.,  25 50 

Daniel. 
vii 95 

HOSEA. 

vi.,  6 88,  213 

Joel. 
iii.,  1 431 

MiCAH. 

v.,  1 20 

Zechariah. 

ix.,  9 355,  356 

xi.,  12 381 

xiii 50 

Malachi. 

iii 50 

iii.,  1 399 

Wisdom  of  Solomon. 
vii.,  27 367 

NEW  TESTAMENT. 
Mattuewt. 

i.,  1-17  18,19 

i.,  18-25 13-20 

i.,  25 29 

ii.,  1  20,21 

ii.,  1-23  24,28 

iii.,  1-12 45-53 

iii.,  7 50-51 

iii.,  11 162 

iii.,  13-17 53-69 

iii.,  14 23 

iv.,  1-11 70-75 

iv.,  12 180 

iv.,  13,  seq 162 

iv.,  18,  19 163 

iv.,  21 1G4 

iv.,  25 157 

v.-vii 223-237 

V.  12 227 

v.,  13-16 83,  86 

v.,  17 91 

v.,  25,  26  32 

v.,  40,  42  234 

vi.,  1-18 235 

vi.,  7-15 207-210 


Page 

vL,  21,  22 106 

vi.,  24 277 

vii.,  1-5  235 

vii.,  6  223,  277 

vii.,  7-n ^207,210 

vii.,  12  230 

vii.,  13-24  236 

vii.,  14  316 

vii.,  21  237 

vii.,  22  I 309 

vii.,  24-27  237 

vii.,  29  40 

viii.,  1-4 237 

viii.,  5-13 97,  139,  238 

viii.,  5,  9 97 

viii.,  5,  10 190 

viii.,  10 139 

viii.,  14-17 186 

viii.,  19-22 310 

viii.,  22 Ill 

viii.,  23-27 191 

viii.,  28-34 192 

ix.,  1-8 250 

ix.,  2-5 145 

ix.,  8 95,96 

is.,  9-13 213 

ix.,  10 213 

ix.,  11-17 203 

ix.,  13 213 

ix.,  14 121,203 

ix.,  15 84,185 

ix.,  16  121,205-207 

ix.,  18 173 

ix.,  18-26 195-198 

ix.,  27-34 240 

ix.,  37,  38 304 

X 257-260,305 

X.,  3  213 

X.,  5,  6  258 

X.,  13 272 

X.,  16 273 

X.,  17-20  394 

X.,  26 185 

X.,  26,  27  249 

X.,  34-36 315 

X.,  38  273,  309 

X.,  42  287 

xi.,  2-3 60 


444 


PASSAGES  OF  SCRIPTURE. 


Vase 
xi.,  2-19 198-201 

xi.,  12 46,  201 

xi.,  16 50,51 

xi.,  20-24 305 

xi.,  20-27 202 

xi.,  25 119 

xi.,  25-27 308 

xi.,  27 97 

xi.,  28 82 

xi.,  28-30 202 

xi.,  30 90 

xii.,  1  71 

xii.,  1-8 255,  256 

xii.,  5-8.; 89,  95,  137,  171,  219 

xii.,  6 219 

xii.,  13  252,  253 

xii.,  18  255 

xii.,  22 150,  240 

xii.,  24-26  240 

xii.,  28  173,  217 

xii.,  30,  31 241 

xii.,  31-33  243 

xii.,  32 249,296 

xii.,  35  19 

xii.,  39 72,  136 

xii.,  40 245,  423 

xii.,  41-43  242 

xii.,  43 115 

xii.,  43-45 242 

xii.,  46-50 244 

xiii 108 

xiii.,  1-23 188 

xiii.,  10  104 

xiii.,  11,  12,  13  104 

xiii.,  16,  17  308 

xiii.,  20-23  189 

xiii.,  24-30  190 

xiii.,  44-46  311 

xiii.,  4-i;-50  190 

xiii.,  52 101,366 

xiii.,  54' 29 

xiii.,  54-58  186,187 

xiii.,  55  IG,  29 

xiv.,  1,  2 270 

xiv.,  2 261 

xiv.,  3,  5  179 

xiv.,  13-21 261 

xiv.,  22-33 264 

XV.,  1  l.*)? 

XV.,  1-20 2.5C 

XV.,  11  88 

XV.,  21-28  279 

XV.,  21  204,  270 

XV.,  29-39  261 

XV.,  32  263 

XV.,  39  264 

xvi.,  1-4 320 


XVI.,  1 264,  266 

xvi.,  6 249 

xvi.,  9,  10 263 

xvi.,  13-28 270-273 

xvi.,  14 82, 139 

xvi.,  16 94 

xvi.,  16,  17 139 

xvi.,  18 124,  271 

xvi.,  20-23 272 

xvi.,  21  283,  423 

xvi.,  24  273,  309 

xvi.,  39  263 

xvii.,  1-21  281-286 

xvii.,  9 282 

xvii.,  24 40 

xvii.,  24-27 290,  291 

xviii.,  1-5 286,  287 

xviii.,  3 174 

xviii.,  12-14  214,215 

xix.,  1 328 

xix.,  2-12  328 

xix.,  8  233 

xix.,  13-15 331 

xix.,  16-24 332,  seq. 

xix.,  17  64,  97,  333 

xix.,  27 335,  3.50 

xix.,  28  ..  83,  86,87,94,  117, 
174,  3.35 

XX.,  1-16 349 

XX.,  2 380 

XX.,  16 349 

XX.,  17-19  '344 

XX.,  20-29  347 

XX.,  25,  seq 125 

XX.,  28  386 

XX.,  30,  seq 345 

xxi.,  1-22 354-359 

xxi.,  2-7 355 

xxi.,  12,  13  168 

xxi.,  14 157 

xxi.,  15,  16  357 

xxi.,  18 357 

xxi.,  21 358 

xxi.,  25 360 

xxi..  32 50,  52 

xxi.,  33-44 371 

xxi.,  46 360 

xsii.,  1-14 369 

xxii.,  14  ..-: 349 

xxii.,  15-40 300-363 

xxii.,  22 370 

xxii.,  23,  seq 3.5,  361 

xxii.,  29-32 361 

xxii.,  32 362 

xxii.,  40 229 

xxii.,  41,  seq 97,364 

xxiii.  (van).  89,246-250,366 


xxiii.,  3  249 

xxiii.,  25  246 

xxiii.,  34  248 

xxiii.,  37-30  .  83,  86,  1 57,  324 
xxiv.  (van).  317,318,367,  369 

xxiv.,  28  318 

XXV 372 

XXV.,  1-13  373 

XXV.,  14-30  372 

XXV.,  28  373 

XXV.,  31-46  373 

xxvi.,  3-5  3.59 

xxvi.,  5  378 

xxvi.,  6  212 

xxvi.,  6-13  351-353 

xxvi.,  14-16 379,  seq. 

xxvi.,  17-19 384,  seq. 

xxvi.,  20-25  387 

xxvi.,  26-29 388,  seq. 

xxvi.,  45  408 

xxvi.,  53  71 

xxvi.,  57 — xxvii.,  26  410-418 

xxvi.,  61  171 

xxvi.,  63  94 

xxvi.,  64  95 

xxvi.,  65,.  66  412 

xxvii.,  5 381,  383 

xxvii.,  7 381 

xxvii.,  9 381 

xxvii.,  11 413 

xxvii.,  20 395 

xxvii.,  34 418 

xxvii.,  42 71 

xxvii.,  51 42 1 

xxvii.,  57 173 

xxviii 422-436 

xxviii.,  19  li;5 

Mark. 

2-8  48-.^3 

9-11  53-69 

12,13  70-75 

16-20 162-164 

29-39  18C 

11.,  1-12  250 

ii.,  13-17 213 

i.,  15-22 203-207 

i.,  18  121 

i.,  20  84,  185 

i.,  21  205 

i.,  24  85 

i.,  23-28 255 

ii.,  28  89,  95 

,1-6 252 

,,  6 360 

,  14 116 

,  21-29 111,244 


QUOTED  OR  ALLUDED  TO. 


445 


Page 

iii.,  22-30 239-243 

Hi.,  31-35 29,  244 

iv.,  1-20 188,  seq. 

iv.,  2 188 

iv.,  10 103 

iv.,  11 103,  104 

iv.,  10-25 189 

iv.,  21-25 106 

iv.,  22 249 

iv.,  26-29 315 

iv.,  30-32 314 

iv.,  31  85 

iv.,  35;  v.,  43  191-198 

iv.,  36-41 191 

v.,  1 151 

v.,  1-20 192 

v.,  19 194 

v.,  21 195 

vi.,  1-6 186,  187 

vL.,  3  40 

vi.,  7-13 257-260 

vi.,  14-16 260 

vi.,  17-20 179 

vi.,  30-44 261-264 

vi.,  45-52 264 

vii.,  1-23 256,  257 

vii.,1  156 

vii.,  15  88 

vii.,  24  270,279 

viii.,  1-8 263 

viii.,  15 249 

viii.,  22-26 270 

viii.,  23 142 

viii.,  27 ;  ix.,  1 270-273 

viii.,  28 81 

viii.,  30 272 

viii.,  31 423 

viii.,  34,35 273 

ix.,  1-9 281-283 

ix.,  11-13 283 

ix.,  14-29 283-286 

ix.,  15 284 

ix.,  23 285,286 

ix.,  28,29 286 

ix.,  33-41 286-288 

ix.,  49 311 

ix.,  50 311,312 

X..  I  328 

X.,  3-12 328-331 

X.,  13-36 331,  seq. 

X.,  17,  seq 332 

X.,18  64,97 

X.,  22  334 

X.,  32-34 345 

X.,  35-45 347 

X.,  4G-52 345 

xi.,  1-11 354-357 

xi.,  12 357 


xi.,  15-19 354-359 

xi.,  23 286,358 

xi.,  27-33 360 

xii.,  1-12  371 

xii.,  13-34  360-363 

xii.,  14,  15  360 

xii.,  18  1.5,363 

xii.,  28-34  173-362 

xii.,  33  88 

xii.,  35-37  19,97,364 

xii.,  38-44  366 

xiii 366-369 

xiii.,  11 394 

xiii.,  32 368 

xiv.,1,  2 378 

xiv.,  3-9 351 

xiv.,  10,11  379,  seq. 

xiv.,  12-16 384-386 

xiv.,  17-21 387 

xiv.,  22-25 388,  seq. 

xiv.,  27 394 

xiv.,  32-42 407,  seq. 

xiv.,  43-49  408,  seq. 

xiv.,  53,  seq 410,  seq. 

xiv.,  58 171 

xiv.,  59 171 

XV.,  1-15 413-417 

XV.,  16-46 418-422 

XV.,  21 417 

XV.,  23  418 

XV.,  29  170 

XV.,  30  71 

xvi 422,  438 

xvi.,  9 151 

Luke. 

i.,  1-4  16 

i.,  26-38  13-18 

i.,  32-35 19 

i.,  36  65 

ii.,  1-20  18-22 

ii.,  22-38 23-28 

ii.,  33 24 

ii.,  39  28,29 

ii.,  41 156 

ii.,  41-52 30-32 

ii.,  44  30 

iii.,  1-17 48-53 

iii.,  2 49 

iii.,  7 51 

iii.,  15 53 

iii.,  17 54 

iii.,  19,20 179 

iii.,  21,22 5.3-69 

iii.,  23-38 19 

iv.,1-13 70-75 

iv.,  16-30 180,  seq. 

iv.,  17,  seq 83 


Page 

iv.,  19 85 

iv.,  22,  seq 16 

iv.,  38-41  186 

v.,  1-11 162,  seq. 

v.,  1 155 

v.,  5 163 

v.,  12-14 237 

v.,  17-26 250 

v.,  20 143 

v.,  27-32 213 

v.,  29 213 

V,  33 121,  203 

v.,  33-39 203-206 

v.,  35 84,185 

v.,  37 85,  205 

vi.,  1-5 255,  256 

vi.,  1  71,155 

vi.,  4 92,  93 

vi.,  5 88,  seq.,  95,  256 

vi.,  6-11  252 

vi.,  9 253 

vi.,  13 116,223 

vi.,  17 157 

vi.,  20-49  223,237 

vii.,  1-10 238 

vii.,  2,  seq 139 

vii.,  3 239 

vii.,  6 97,196,  239 

vii.,  9 97 

vii.,  11-17 197 

vii.,  18-35 198-201 

vii.,  28  59,  84,  199 

vii.,  29,  30 50 

vii.,  36-50 211 

viii.,  2 151 

viii.,  4-15 188 

viii.,  9-18 189 

viii.,  10 103 

viii.,  18 105 

viii.,  19 244 

viii.,  21 29,245 

viii.,  22-56 191-198 

viii.,  26 151 

viii.,  26-29 151 

viii.,  29 193 

viii.,  40 195 

viii.,  46-48 195 

viii.,  49 196 

ix.,  1-17 257-261 

ix.,  3 305 

ix.,  7 270 

ix.,  7-9 280 

ix.,  9 323 

ix.,  10 261 

ix.,  10-18 270 

ix..  18-27 270-273 

ix.,  19 81 

ix.,22 423 


•146 


PASSAGES  OF  SCRIPTURE 


Page 

ix.,  £3,  2-1 273 

ix.,  28-36 281 

ix.,  33 .• 282 

ix.,  36 283 

ix.,  37-43 283,286 

ix.,  46-50 286,289 

ix.,  50 242 

ix.,  51,  seq 157,303 

ix.,  51-56 324,325 

ix.,  57-C2 309 

ix.,  60 Ill 

X.,  1-24 304-309 

X.,  2  304 

X.,  3  273 

X.,  21 119 

X.,  22 97 

X.,  25-37 363 

X.,  29 364 

X.,  29-31 364 

X.,  38-42 157,336,352 

xi.,  1-13 207-210 

xi.,  1 204 

xi.,  9 207 

xi.,  14-26 239-243 

xi.,  14 150 

xi.,  16 245 

xi.,  20-22 136 

xi.,  23 242 

xi.,  24,  seq 115 

xi.,  27,  28  . ..  97, 101, 189,  245 

xi.,  29-36 136,245 

xi.,  30 89 

xi.,  33 246,339 

xi.,  34 106 

xi.,  34-36 246 

xi.,  37-52 246,  seq. 

xi.,  39 246 

xi.,  41-44 247 

xi.,  4.S-52  248 

xi.,  49 248,367 

xi..  50-.52 242 

xii.,  3  185,  248 

Xii.,  5  249 

xii.,  10  243 

xii.,  11,  12 394 

xii.,  12  431 

xii.,  13-15  312 

xii.,  34  106 

xii.,  36-48  318 

xii.,  49  85 

xii.,  49-53 31.^-317 

xii.,  54-59  320 

xii.,  58,59  233 

xiii.,  1-5 321 

Xiii.,  2-4 144 

xiii.,  6-9 357-358 

xiii.,  10-17 253 

xiii.,  18-21 314 


Paje 

xiii.,  19 85 

xiii.,  21 85,  86 

xiii.,  22 303 

xiii.,  23-30  319 

xiii.,  24,  25 236 

xiii.,  28 320 

xiii.,  30 349 

xiii.,  31-33 303,323 

xiii.,  33 324 

xiii.,  34,  35  ..  83,  86,  157,  324 

xiv.,  1-24 253,  254 

xiv.,  5 253 

xiv.,  12-14 254 

xiv.,  16-24 371 

xiv.,  25-35 309-312 

XV.,  1-10 214,215 

XV.,  11-32  215 

xvi.,  1-13 274-277 

xvi.,  14 274 

xvi.,  16 201 

xvi.,  19-31 321 

xvi.,  31 136,  322,  428 

xvii.,  5,  6  350 

xvii.,  6 285,286,359 

xvii.,  7-10  350 

xvii.,  11  303 

xvii.,  11-19 324,325 

xvii.,  15  325 

xvii.,  20-37 317 

xvii.,  21  82 

xvii.,  26-38  318 

xvii.,  34-36  318 

xvii.,  37  318 

xviii.,  1-8 318,319 

xviii.,  9-14 216 

xviii.,  15-30 331-335 

xviii.,  19 64,97 

xviii.,  28 350 

xviii.,  31-34 345 

xviii.,  35-43 345 

xix.,  1-10 346,347 

xix.,  11 347 

xix.,  12 372 

xix.,  28-48 354-357 

xix.,  39 356 

xix.,  41-44 356 

xix.,  45-46 168 

XX.,  1-8 359 

XX.,  2 169 

XX.,  3-6 379 

XX.,  9-18 371 

XX.,  20-26 300 

XX.,  27-40  35,361,362 

XX.,  39  362 

XX.,  41-44 97,  364,  3C5 

xxi 369 

xxi.,  1-4 366 

xxi.,  5,  seq.,  ad  fin.  .  366-369 


PajB 

xxii.,  3-6 379.  3S0 

xxii.,  7-13 384,385 

xxii.,  14-23  386-391 

xxii.,  16 386 

xxii.,  17-20 388 

xxii.,  24 287,  348 

xxii.,  25,  seq 124 

xxii.,  26,  27 386 

xxii.,  30 117 

xxii.,  33,  34 392 

xxii.,  35 2fiO 

xxii.,  35-38 392-394 

xxii.,  39-46 407 

xxii.,  47-53' 408-410 

xxii.,  .52 410 

xxii.,  54;  xxiii.,  25.  410-418 

xxii.,  61 411 

xxii.,  66 410 

xxiii.,  3  413 

xxiii.,  5  415 

xxiii.,  8  323 

xxiii.,  19  410 

xxiii.,  26-56 418-422 

xxiii.,  27-31 418 

xxiii.,  37-39 71 

xxiii.,  50  173 

xxiii.,  54 385 

xxiv 422-438 


John. 


4  ... 
7-15 
14  .. 
19  .. 


295 

56 

16 

t;3 

19-45 159-102 

,29 C8,  69,  KiO 

30  161 

31 61,66 

32,34  63 

33,  34  68 

42 1  ti-J,  -^7 1 

42-47  u;2 

43-46  3  64 

50 .Q4 

50,  51 139,  164 

52 95 

,  1-11 166 

,3-5  16 

,9 107 

,12 29 

,  12-25  168-173 

,  18 169.360 

,19 90,  137,  170,  423 

i.,  1-15 173-177 

i.,  2 40 

i.,  6 16 

i.,  13 95,  96 

i.,  15 177 


QUOTED  OR  ALLUDED  TO. 


447 


iii.,  lC-21 177 

iii.,  ]  8 373 

iii.,  22 125 

iii.,  22-30  177-179 

iii.,  23 178 

iii.,  24 180 

iii.,  30 179 

iii.,  31-36 179 

iii.,  32 56 

iv.,  1-42 90,  180 

iv.,  2 126 

iv.,  16 181 

iv.,  21-24 91,182 

iv.,  34  70 

iv.,  37,38 185 

iv.,  43-54 186 

iv.,  44,  45 100,  168 

iv.,  46  185 

iv.,  48 138 

v.,  1-47 217-222 

v..  1 217 

v.,  4 217 

v.,  10 218 

v.,  14 143 

v.,  17-19 218 

v.,  20-29 219 

v.,  27 96 

v.,  30-37 220 

v.,  31,  32 221 

v.,  35 50,  51 

v.,  37-47 221 

vi.,  1-15  261-264 

vi.,  4  217 

vi.,  5  26] 

vi.,  15  262 

vi.,  16-21 264 

vi.,  17 263 

vi.,  22-71  26^-269 

vi.,  25 40 

\-i.,  26 137 

vi.,  30 265 

vi.,  32-42 266 

vi.,  34 70 

vi.,  36-44 138 

vi.,  42,  seq 16 

vi.,  43-47 fe66 

vi.,  44 106 

vi.,  44,  45 • 104 

vi.,  48-51 267 

vi.,  53 96,  267 

vi.,  53-58 267 

vi.,  60 103,  268 

vi.,  61  263 

vi.,  63 101,  113,  114 

vi.,  64 118,379 

vi.,  66 140,  268 

vi.,  69 140,269 

vi,,  70 384 


vii.,  1-52;  viii.,  12;  x., 

21  291-303 

vii.,  1 217 

vii.,  3 29,217 

vii.,  3,  4  292 

vii.,  5 16 

vii.,  5-7 245 

vii.,  8 291 

vii.,  10 303 

vii.,  12 82 

vii.,  15 40 

vii.,  16-19 292 

vii.,  17 293 

vii.,  26,  27,  30  293 

vii.,  35,  38 294 

vii.,  40 82 

vii.,  40-53 297 

vii.,  42 364 

viii.,  1-11 313 

viii.,  13,  14 294,  295 

viii.,  15 295,  313 

viii.,  19-23 295 

viii.,  25 82 

viii.,  28 295 

viii.,  30-38 296 

viii.,  33 106 

viii.,  39 299 

viii.,  43 106 

viii.,  44 106,  148 

viii.,  57 297 

ix.,  2,  3 145 

ix.,  5 339 

ix.,  6 142 

ix..  22 298 

ix.,  35-37 300 

X.,  1,  seq 112,  236,  301 

X.,  16 259 

X.,  17,18 423 

X.,  20 244 

X.,  22 303 

X.,  22-39 326 

X.,  24 82 

X.,  36 327 

X.,  40 323 

Xi 326-344 

xi.,  54-56 ,  344 

xi.,  56,  57 359 

xii.,  1-8  351-353 

xii.,  1  354 

xii.,  5  380 

xii.,  6  352,380 

xii.,  9-18  354-357 

xii.,  14  355 

xii.,  19  359 

xii.,  20-36  375-378 

xii.,  25,  26  273 

xii.,  27  405 

xii.,  27-29 376 


P.ijre 
xii.,  31  307 

xii.,  32  311 

xii.,  34  95 

xiii.,  1-32 384-388 

xiii.,  2  379 

xiii.,  2-16 386 

xiii.,  11-21,  seq 387 

xiii.,  19 387 

xiii.,  21 387,  405 

xiii.,  26 379 

xiii.,  27 382,405 

xiii.,  31-36 , 388 

xiii.,  33-35 391 

xiii.,  36-38 392 

xiv.-xvii 394-404 

xiv.,  9,  10,  11 396 

xiv.,  12 140 

xiv.,  13-26 397 

xiv.,  23-26 398 

xiv.,  27 398,  431 

xiv.,  29-31 339 

XV 399-400 

sv.,  1,  seq 107,  3.')9 

XV.,  14-16 120 

XV.,  16 116 

XV.,  18-25 400 

XV.,  24 138 

XV.,  27 317 

xvi.,  7-33 400 

xvi.,  10 403 

xvi.,  14-17 401 

xvi.,  24 402 

xvi.,  25 102,  105 

xvi.,  29,30 402 

xvi.,  32 394 

xvii 402 

xvii.,  2 308 

xvii.,  20-24  403 

xviii.,  1-11 40S-410 

xviii.,  9 172 

xviii.,  11,  12 409 

xviii.,  13 410 

xviii.,  14 410 

xviii.,  19-23 410 

xviii.,  24,  25 411 

xviii.,  28 384 

xviii.,  33 413 

xviii.,  33-38 99 

xviii.,  36,  37 413 

xix.,  1-10 416 

xix.,  10-12 417 

xix.,  17-42 417-422 

xix.,  31 385 

xix.,  31-37 426 

xix.,  34,  36,  37 427 

XX..  1,  seq 428 

XX.,  8,  9 423 

XX.,  17,18,19 423 


418 


PASSAGES 


Pace 
XX.,  23   272 

XX.,  27   140 

XX.,  30    428 

xx.,.xxi 422-436 

Acts. 

'••  4   431 

i-  5  126 

»•-  15 305 

i-,  18   : 381,383 

i.,  21,  seq 117 

ii-.  38 125 

vi.,  14  90, 171 

vii.,  5G 95 

viii.,  14 185 

X.,  37 56,  58 

xiii.,  25 53,56,  58 

xvi.,  16,  seq 193 

xvii.,  28  15 

xviii.,  25,  26   58 

xix.,  1-5 58 

xix.,  13 283 

XX.,  35 93,334 

Romans. 

i-.3  19 

i-  4   16 

ii-.  1 314 

ii.,  12,  seq 373 

iii.,  31 92 


OF  SCRIPTURE  QUOTED,  ETC. 

vi.,9,10  43;|...  Galatians. 

viii.,  3,  4 92     '"•'  ^'^ 

ix.,  5 16     i^'  •*  !■ 

xiii.,  6 290  I  ^''•'  ^^ 

xiv.,  22,  23 94 

xvi.,  19 273  1  Thessalonians. 


Page 
.    329 

23,89 

.    175 


1  Corinthians. 


1.,  22  ... 
ii.,  14... 
iv.,  8-13 
v.,  7,  8  .. 


99 

104 

.,. ..   234 

385 

vi.,  2 87,335 

^•i-,  7 234 

vii.,  10   234 

viii 94 

ix.,  1 117 

xi.,  23 385,388 

xi.,  25 391 

xiii.,  1-3 309 

xiv.,  20 273 

XV 427,  seq. 

XV.,  C   305,  425 

XV.,  7,  9   117 

XV.,  55    271 

2  Corinthians. 

ii.,  15,  16 272 

v., 17 175 

xiii.,  4 437 


v.,  1  . 
v.,  21 


2  Thessalonians. 


ii.,  8 


Titus. 


iii..  2,  6 

Hebrews. 

.     170 

v.,  7  . . . 

..    406 

vii.,  14 

. .    364 

xii.,  2  .. 

..    423 

1  John. 


403 
403 


James. 
i.,  9,  10  225 


PASSAGES   FROM  ANCIENT  WRITERS 

aUOTED    OR    ALLUDED    TO. 


Pag' 
426 


426 


175 


167 


Acta  Sanctorum. 
Jan.,  iii.,  571,  p.  709 , 

Julius  Africanus. 
Fragm.  (vid.  G.  Syncell.,  ed.  Niebuhr,  i. 
610) 

Ammianus  Marcell. 
Hist,  xiv.,  9 

Antoninus. 

Monolog.,  xi.,  1  

AthentBus. 

Deipnosophist.,  ii.,  17,  18 

Cod.  Cantabrig. 
Fragm.  (Luk.,  vi.,  4) 

Cassiodonis. 
Lib.  iii.,  ep.  52 

Chagigah. 

(Tract.  Talmud)  ii 

Chronic.  Pasch.  Alex. 

(Ed.  Niebuhr)  i.,  13 

Chrysostomus. 

Horn,  in  Matt.,  xxx.,  4 

Clemens  Alexandr. 

Strom.,  iii.,  p.  449 

Strom.,  iv.,  11  

Homil.  Clement. 

Horn.,  ii,  23 

Horn.,  xi.,  26 

Eiayy.  Kar'  Efip. 
(Vid.  Fahricius.) 

Fragm.  (Ignat.,  ep.  ad  Ephes.,  §  19)   25 

Fragm 49 

Fragm ^ 65,  seq 

Fragm 68 

Fragm 313 

Fragm 334 

Fragm.  (Hieron.,vii.,  1,  336) 422 

Fragm.  (Hieron.  de  Vir.  m.,  ii.) 432 

Etisebius. 

Hist.  Eccl.,i.,12 304 

Hist.  Eccl.,  i.,  13 304 

Hist.  Eccl.,  iii.,  39   313 

Hist.  Eccl.,  iv.,  22  203 

Hist.  Eccl.,  v.,  20 394 

Hist.  Eccl.,  v.,  24 385 


Chronic.  Olymp.,  202,  4 

Onomast.  Fragm.  (Hier.,  iii.,  163) 

Onomast.  Fragm.  (Hier.,  iii.,  1,  181)  .... 
Evang.  Nazar. 

Fragm.  (Hier.  adv.  Pelag.,  iii.) 

Fragm.  (Hier.,  iv.,  1, 156) 

Evang.  Nicod. 
Cap.  ii.  (Thilo.,  i.,  520) 

Fahricius. 
Cod.  Apocryph.  Nov.  Testament,  (i.,  330  ; 
iii.,  524) 

Gemara. 
(Talmud)   


iv.,  1,  882 


Hieronymus. 
Hippolytus. 
Ircneeus. 


421 
178 
217 

66 
68 

416 


278 
422 
425 


De  Pasch.,  i.,  13 

Cont.  Hser.,  ii.,  22 217 

Jacobus. 
Protoevang.,  ix 15 

Josephns. 

C.  Apion,  i.,  8 36 

C.  Apion,  i.,  31 237 

ArchjBol.,  iii,,  11,  §3 237 

Archaeol.,  viii.,  2,  4 133 

Archaeol.,  viii.,  2,  5 150,  194 

Archfeol.,  x.,  2,  1 133 

ArchsBol.,  xiii.,  x.,  6 36 

Archaeol.,  xiv.,  xv.,  12 251 

ArchjBol.,  XV.,  viii.,  4 27 

Archaeol.,  xvii.,  i.,  2 233 

Archaeol.,  xvii.,  6,  5 28 

Archaeol,  xvii.,  13,  2  29 

Archaeol.,  xviii.,  1,  4   51 

Archffiol.,  xviii.,  1,  5 39 

Archaeol.,  xviii.,  2,  1   261 

Archaeol.,  xviii.,  v.,  2 49,  179 

Archaeol.,  six.,  1  46 

Archaeol.,  xx.,  9,  1 412 

De  Bell.  Jud.,  ii.,  8,  6 38 

De  Bell.  Jud.,  vi.,  9,  3 354 

De  Bell.  Jud.,  vii.,  6,  3  147 

De  Vita,  2 31,  48 

De  Vita,  75 425 


450 


PASSAGES  FROM  ANCIENT  WRITERS. 


Jiiatin  Martyr. 

Dial.  c.  Trj"l>li-.  f-  304,  a 

Dial.  c.  Ti-3'ph.,  f.  316 

Dial.  c.  Tryph.,  f.  327 

Dial.  c.  Tryph.,  f.  335 

Dial.  c.  Tryph.,  f.  363  

Macrobius. 
Satumal.,  ii..  4 


Origencs. 

C.  Celsnm,  i.,  32 

C.  Celsnm,  ii.,  12 

C.  Celsum,  vi.,  36  

Tom.  vi.,  in  Joann.,  24 

Tom,  Ix.,  in  Joann 

Tom.  xiii.,  iu  Joann.,  22 

Matt,  xiii.,  6  


Papias. 

Fragm.  (Eus.,  iii.,  39) 

Fragni.  (Crapi.,  Oaten.,  p.  12) 

Kfipuyii.  (Int.  Oper.  Cypr.  de  rebapt.  fin.) 
Philo. 

De  Migrat.  Abraami 

Legat.  ad  Cajum.  23,  31 

De  Special.  Leg.,  1 

De  Execrat.,  9 

De  Vit.  Mos.,  iii.,  5 


Pag 
21 

40 

19 

427 

233 


14 
116 

40 
192 
169 
183 
145 

111 
383 


Page 


Pirke  Aboth. 
(Talmud),  1.,  3 "in 

Plinius. 

Hist.  Nat,  xxviii.,  7 142 

Plutarchus. 
De  Sera  Num.  Vind.,  ix 311 

Poli/lius. 
i.,  80,  13   426 

Ruinart. 
Acta  Martyr.,  220 418 

Seneca. 
Ad  Lucil.,  vi 1T4 

Simplicius. 
Comm.  on  Epict 310 

Sophocles. 
CEd.  Tyr.,  868 i 

Suetonius. 
Vespas.,  4 26 

Tacitus. 

Ann.,  i.,  11 20 

Hist,  v.,  13 26 

Testain.  xii.  Patr. 

Test.  Simeon,  7  {;:> 

Tcrtullianus. 

De  Jejun.,  xii 418 

Adv.  Marc,  iii.,  19 418 


§arpcr'0  Nctu  iHatalogue. 

A  NEW  Descriptive  Cataloguk  of  Harper  &  Brothers'  Publica- 
tions is  now  ready  for  distribution,  and  may  be  obtained  gratuitously  on 
application  to  the  Publishers  personally,  or  by  letter,  post-paid. 

Tlie  attention  of  gentlemen,  in  town  or  country,  designing  to  fc:m  Li- 
braries or  enrich  their  literary  collections,  is  respectfully  invited  to  this 
Catalogue,  which  will  be  found  to  comprise  a  large  proportion  of  the  stand- 
ard and  most  esteemed  works  in  English  Literature — comprehending 
AnouT  TWO  TiiousAND  VOLUMES — whlch  are  offered  inmost  instances  at 
less  than  one  half  the  cost  of  similar  productions  in  England. 

To  Librarians  and  others  connected  with  Colleges,  Schools,  etc.,  who 
may  not  have  access  to  a  reliable  guide  in  forming  the  true  estimate  of 
literary  productions,  it  is  believed  the  present  Catalogue  will  prove  espe- 
cially valuable  as  a  manual  of  reference. 

To  prevent  disappointment,  it  is  suggested  that,  whenever  books  can 
not  be  obtained  through  any  bookseller  or  local  agent,  applications  with 
remittance  should  be  addressed  direct  to  the  Publishers,  which  will  be 
promptly  attended  to. 

82  Cliff  Street,  New  Yurk.  Nov.,  1847. 


n 


BS2420 .N351 

The  life  of  Jesus  Christ  in  its 

Princeton  Theological  Semmary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00013  0726 


DATE   DUE 


PRINTEDINUS  A 


GAYLOHO 


